We held an interest group session at the 16th Annual Conference of the Japanese Primary Care Association to share best practices for diagnostic excellence in primary care. In addition to physicians, pharmacists and a medical clerk participated in the session. Participants provided examples of good practices for patient engagement and interprofessional collaboration during group discussion, which included themes such as "sharing diagnostic information," "safety netting to address diagnostic uncertainty," and "feedback about diagnostic errors."

Objective: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of niraparib in Japanese women with heavily pretreated ovarian cancer. Methods: This was the follow-up analysis of a phase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study in Japanese women with homologous recombination-deficient, platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who had completed 3–4 lines of chemotherapy and were poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor naïve. Participants received niraparib (starting dose, 300 mg) once daily in continuous 28-day cycles until objective disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate (ORR), as assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: 20 patients were enrolled in the study and included in both efficacy and safety analyses. Median total study duration was 759.5 days. Median dose intensity was 201.3 mg/ day. Confirmed ORR was 60.0% (90% confidence interval [CI]=39.4–78.3); 2 patients had complete response and 10 patients had partial response. Median duration of response was 9.9 months (95% CI=3.9–26.9) and the disease control rate was 90.0% (95% CI=68.3–98.8).The most common TEAEs were anemia (n=15), nausea (n=12), and decreased platelet count (n=11). TEAEs leading to study drug dose reduction, interruption, or discontinuation were reported in 16 (80.0%), 15 (75.0%), and 2 patients (10.0%), respectively. Conclusion The long-term efficacy and safety profile of niraparib was consistent with previous findings in the equivalent population in non-Japanese patients. No new safety signals were identified.

Objective: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of niraparib in Japanese women with heavily pretreated ovarian cancer. Methods: This was the follow-up analysis of a phase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study in Japanese women with homologous recombination-deficient, platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who had completed 3–4 lines of chemotherapy and were poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor naïve. Participants received niraparib (starting dose, 300 mg) once daily in continuous 28-day cycles until objective disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate (ORR), as assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: 20 patients were enrolled in the study and included in both efficacy and safety analyses. Median total study duration was 759.5 days. Median dose intensity was 201.3 mg/ day. Confirmed ORR was 60.0% (90% confidence interval [CI]=39.4–78.3); 2 patients had complete response and 10 patients had partial response. Median duration of response was 9.9 months (95% CI=3.9–26.9) and the disease control rate was 90.0% (95% CI=68.3–98.8).The most common TEAEs were anemia (n=15), nausea (n=12), and decreased platelet count (n=11). TEAEs leading to study drug dose reduction, interruption, or discontinuation were reported in 16 (80.0%), 15 (75.0%), and 2 patients (10.0%), respectively. Conclusion The long-term efficacy and safety profile of niraparib was consistent with previous findings in the equivalent population in non-Japanese patients. No new safety signals were identified.

Objective: To evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of niraparib in Japanese women with heavily pretreated ovarian cancer. Methods: This was the follow-up analysis of a phase 2, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study in Japanese women with homologous recombination-deficient, platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who had completed 3–4 lines of chemotherapy and were poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor naïve. Participants received niraparib (starting dose, 300 mg) once daily in continuous 28-day cycles until objective disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was confirmed objective response rate (ORR), as assessed using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results: 20 patients were enrolled in the study and included in both efficacy and safety analyses. Median total study duration was 759.5 days. Median dose intensity was 201.3 mg/ day. Confirmed ORR was 60.0% (90% confidence interval [CI]=39.4–78.3); 2 patients had complete response and 10 patients had partial response. Median duration of response was 9.9 months (95% CI=3.9–26.9) and the disease control rate was 90.0% (95% CI=68.3–98.8).The most common TEAEs were anemia (n=15), nausea (n=12), and decreased platelet count (n=11). TEAEs leading to study drug dose reduction, interruption, or discontinuation were reported in 16 (80.0%), 15 (75.0%), and 2 patients (10.0%), respectively. Conclusion The long-term efficacy and safety profile of niraparib was consistent with previous findings in the equivalent population in non-Japanese patients. No new safety signals were identified.

Objective : To determine how much label information on over-the-counter (OTC) medicines is contained on packaging, we investigated the items, description methods, and area of label information on packages.
Methods : We selected 75 common cold remedy products for investigation and classified the items into 3 categories (“items for use”, “items with a regulation requirement”, “items related to product image”) and measured the space given to each item in the total package area.
Results : All 75 products had “items with a regulation requirement (total 13 items),” but 8 products (only 2 manufacturers) had “consult a physician or pharmacist before use,” which was not a regulation requirement.  There were differences in description methods, especially in “caution” and “product name.”  Sixty percent of the OTC products used non-red characters with no box-frame, and 11% used red characters and box-frames.  The description order was not standardized, but “caution” was located in the lowest space on 80% of products.  Many item descriptions appeared in one place, but “product name” generally appeared in more than 4 places. While 4.5 to 8.0 points were commonly given for “items for use,” 16 to 100 points were given for “product name,” and the difference in number of points was greater than 6-fold among products.  The percentage of average area for “items related to product image” (6.1%) was 2-fold greater than for “items for use” (3.1%) and “items with a regulation requirement” (2.9%).  Almost half of the total package area was blank space.
Conclusion : Current descriptions in label information vary among items, products, and pharmaceutical companies.  Rules on describing information on OTC medicine packaging are thus necessary.