The Hematologist

May-June 2019, Volume 16, Issue 3

The Hazards of Hazardous Drug Labeling: Time to Revisit Hydroxyurea?

Andrea Cervi, MD, MSc PGY-4 Hematology
McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Artemis Diamantouros, BScPhm, MEd, PhD † Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Madeleine Verhovsek, MD, FRCPC Associate Professor
McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Published on: April 27, 2019

Despite benefits in reducing pain crises, transfusions, hospitalizations, and mortality in sickle cell disease (SCD),1-5 hydroxyurea (HU) is underutilized.1,6,7 A recent Cochrane meta-analysis found no significant increase in adverse events among HU-treated patients with SCD,8 yet fears of possible adverse effects have been identified as a key barrier to HU acceptance.9-11 In light of the poor uptake of HU among the SCD population, hematologists need to fully understand patient and provider reluctance about this disease-modifying therapy.

Fears relating to the carcinogenic and teratogenic potential of HU, along with concerns over the potential effect of HU on reproductive health, are pervasive among patients with SCD.12 Yet, is there basis for these anxieties? These potential toxicities serve as the basis for HU’s classification as a hazardous drug by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), though support for them has not been well-established in the literature.13 The primary purpose of NIOSH drug labeling is to protect workers from potential adverse effects when coming into direct contact with hazardous drugs.13 Based on HU’s classification as a hazardous drug, health care workers are advised to wear double gloves, a protective gown, and sometimes eye and face protection when administering liquid HU and when dealing with HU-contaminated waste.13 Moreover, hospitals adhering to cytotoxic drug-handling guidelines may mandate that a cytotoxic drug warning be posted outside the patient’s hospital room door.14 The implications of the “hazardous drug” listing on patient acceptance of HU should not be underestimated.

NIOSH labels a hazardous drug any agent with carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, reproductive toxicity, organ toxicity at low doses, genotoxicity, and/or structure that mimics existing hazardous drugs.13 Drug package inserts serve as the primary source of information used by the NIOSH Hazardous Drug Committee.15 All drugs identified as hazardous by manufacturer package inserts are automatically added to the list. It is our understanding that HU’s classification has never undergone an independent formal review. Moreover, it is concerning that this classification may be based on data from outdated in vitro and animal models that have since been replaced by long-term follow-up studies in patients with SCD demonstrating safety and efficacy of HU in clinical practice.

How does HU fit within NIOSH’s definition of hazardous? While leukemogenesis has been ascribed to HU since reports of secondary leukemia in patients using this medication for management of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), it is well established that MPNs harbor an inherent propensity toward development of leukemia. A nationwide cohort analysis of MPN patients followed for upwards of 10 years did not identify HU as an independent risk factor for transformation to acute leukemia.16 Similarly, follow-up studies of patients with SCD taking HU have not identified a clear relationship between HU and leukemia.4

Overall, female patients with SCD are advised to avoid HU during pregnancy due to concern for birth defects, based on initial reports of fetal malformations in rodent studies.1 However, congenital anomalies in these studies were seen at doses 10 to 100 times the maximum recommended dose for humans.17 Although prospective studies evaluating the safety of HU in pregnancy do not exist, available case series of female individuals exposed to HU do not provide clear evidence of adverse outcomes.18-20 Decreased sperm production is another potential short-term complication of HU that may be transient and reversible,1 yet it contributes to the hazardous classification by NIOSH. Several studies have been published demonstrating impaired sperm parameters in patients with SCD taking HU; however, a proportion of these defects were present in patients prior to initiating the drug,21 making it difficult to differentiate the relative impact of HU and SCD on sperm production. Further research on the potential impact of HU on reproductive health in SCD is strongly warranted to properly address this key barrier to HU acceptance in the SCD population.

Although NIOSH drug classification processes are assigned with the optimal occupational safety of health care workers in mind, they have also gone on to influence the labeling of medications dispensed in outpatient and inpatient pharmacies. There is obvious concern that by mandating health care professionals to wear extensive personal protective equipment and medication bottles and patient hospital rooms to bear “cytotoxic drug” warnings, HU’s hazardous drug classification may contribute to patient and health care provider misconceptions about HU. It is unknown whether NIOSH’s hazardous labeling of HU has implications for the poor utilization rates to the only pharmacologic disease-modifying therapy that currently exists reported among patients with SCD, and warrants further study.

References

  1. Brawley OW, Cornelius LJ, Edwards LR, et al. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference statement: hydroxyurea treatment for sickle cell disease. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:932-938.
  2. Lanzkron S, Strouse JJ, Wilson R, et al. Systematic review: hydroxyurea for the treatment of adults with sickle cell disease. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:939-955.
  3. Voskaridou E, Christoulas D, Bilalis A, et al. The effect of prolonged administration of hydroxyurea on morbidity and mortality in adult patients with sickle cell syndromes: results of a 17-year, single-center trial (LaSHS). Blood. 2010;115:2354-2363.
  4. Steinberg MH, McCarthy WF, Castro O, et al. The risks and benefits of long-term use of hydroxyurea in sickle cell anemia: A 17.5 year follow-up. Am J Hematol. 2010;85:403-408.
  5. Yawn BP, Buchanan GR, Afenyi-Annan AN, et al. Management of sickle cell disease: summary of the 2014 evidence-based report by expert panel members. JAMA. 2014;312:1033-1048.
  6. Stettler N, McKiernan CM, Melin CQ, et al. Proportion of adults with sickle cell anemia and pain crises receiving hydroxyurea. JAMA. 2015;313:1671-1672.
  7. Candrilli SD, O'Brien SH, Ware RE, et al. Hydroxyurea adherence and associated outcomes among Medicaid enrollees with sickle cell disease. Am J Hematol. 2011;86:273-277.
  8. Nevitt SJ, Jones AP, Howard J. Hydroxyurea (hydroxycarbamide) for sickle cell disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;4:CD002202.
  9. Haywood C Jr, Beach MC, Bediako S, et al. Examining the characteristics and beliefs of hydroxyurea users and nonusers among adults with sickle cell disease. Am J Hematol. 2011;86:85-87.
  10. Badawy SM, Thompson AA, Liem RI. Beliefs about hydroxyurea in youth with sickle cell disease. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Ther. 2018;11:142-148.
  11. Lanzkron S, Haywood C Jr, Hassell KL, et al. Provider barriers to hydroxyurea use in adults with sickle cell disease: a survey of the Sickle Cell Disease Adult Provider Network. J Natl Med Assoc. 2008;100:968-973.
  12. Nahata L, Caltabellotta NM, Ball K, et al. Desire for parenthood and reproductive health knowledge in adolescents and young adults with sickle cell disease and their caregivers. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2018;65: doi: 10.1002/pbc.26829.
  13. Connor TH, MacKenzie BA, DeBord DG, et al. NIOSH list of antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs in healthcare settings, 2016. (Supersedes 2014-138). Centers for Disease Control and Prev. 2016:161:1-34.
  14. Easty AC, Coakley N, Cheng R, et al. Safe handling of cytotoxics: guideline recommendations. Curr Oncol. 2015;22:e27-e37.
  15. Policy and procedures for developing the NIOSH list of antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs in healthcare settings. Centers for Disease Control and Prev. 2018;Feb 9.
  16. Björkholm M, Derolf AR, Hultcrantz M, et al. Treatment-related risk factors for transformation to acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndromes in myeloproliferative neoplasms. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:2410-2415.
  17. Chaube S, Murphy ML. The effects of hydroxyurea and related compounds on the rat fetus. Cancer Res. 1966;26:1448-1457.
  18. Gwer SO, Onyango KO. Prevalence and incidence of congenital anomalies amongst babies born to women with sickle cell disease and exposed to hydroxyurea during pregnancy: a systematic review protocol. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2018;16:1135-1140.
  19. Thauvin-Robinet C, Maingueneau C, Robert E, et al. Exposure to hydroxyurea during pregnancy: a case series. Leukemia. 2001;15:1309-1311.
  20. Ballas SK, McCarthy WF, Guo N, et al. Exposure to hydroxyurea and pregnancy outcomes in patients with sickle cell anemia. J Natl Med Assoc. 2009;101:1046-1051.
  21. Berthaut I, Guignedoux G, Kirsch-Noir F, et al. Influence of sickle cell disease and treatment with hydroxyurea on sperm parameters and fertility of human males. Haematologica. 2008;93:988-993.

Conflict of Interests

Dr. Andrea Cervi, Dr. Artemis Diamantouros, and Dr. Madeleine Verhovsek indicated no relevant conflicts of interest. back to top