Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the palliative care for cancer patients provided by a long-term care unit. Methods: We retrospectively investigated the medical records of 194 patients who hospitalized in our long-term care unit between April 2010 and December 2014. The patients shared with a group of two, narcotic drugs non-use period (previous group; until March 2012) and narcotics use period (later group; in April 2012 or later), and it was compared with a background, hospitalization period, result on discharge, narcotic drug administration, symptom relief. And it was surveyed hospitalization dynamics of our palliative care unit for comparison. Result: Cancer patients were 16 (22%) in previous group of 74 patients and were 79 (66%) in later group of 120. The proportion of cancer patients in later group increased to three times (p<0.001). In later group, the average hospital stay was shortened to half (144 days, p<0.01) and the mortality discharge rates increased (78%, p<0.05). Narcotic drugs were administered to more than half (57%) of cancer patients in later group, and pain relief was significantly better. In the period of later group, number of hospitalized patients in palliative care unit was also increased. Conclusion: It was suggested that the long-term unit can perform palliative care for cancer patients in cooperation with the palliative care unit.

Objective: In the previous study, the CYP database was constructed in order to relate drug-drug interactions to the CYP metabolic information of the package inserts.  In this study, we evaluated the clinical usefulness of the CYP database by using the Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) Drug Monitoring Information.
Methods: We examined the drugs in CYP isoform responsible for drug metabolism.  The age, sex, suspect drugs and co-administered drugs were extracted from 6,236 cases of the PMDA database of drug monitoring from January till November of 2008.
Results: Twenty-three percent of all cases had co-administered drugs.  Forty-five percent of these cases were metabolized both suspect and co-administered drugs by the same CYP isoform, and three fourths of these cases were able to be detected only by the CYP database.  In addition, the administration of substrate medicines in combination with substrate medicines was the largest (57%), followed by cases of substrate medicines in combination with inhibitor medicines (28%).  Seventy-seven percent of the suspect drugs that had a large number of reported cases of side effects were substrate medicines, and the frequency of co-administration with substrate medicines was very high.
Conclusion: These data suggest that the CYP database, being used together with package inserts, might be a clinically useful tool to avoid adverse events caused by drug-drug interactions.