Costs of administration, travelling, and productivity losses associated with hospital administration of multiple myeloma drugs in Finland.

AIM: To estimate the drug administration, travelling, and productivity costs associated with infusion or subcutaneous proteasome inhibitor (PI) treatments (specifically carfilzomib and bortezomib) for multiple myeloma (MM) patients in Finland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Price tariffs of Finnish hospital districts are used as the basis of invoicing sent to healthcare service payers. A review of these price tariff lists was conducted and obtained data analysed to estimate the mean unit cost of PI administration visit. Travelling costs stratified by areas with different population densities were assessed, based on the national travelling reimbursement register data maintained by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland. Productivity costs due to time spent on administration visits and travelling were estimated based on an expert interview and a spatial healthcare accessibility analysis. RESULTS: Nineteen (95%) of the Finnish hospital districts were included in the review. Relevant unit cost information was found for 15 (75%) of the districts. The mean PI administration cost alone was 270€ (95% CI = 189€-351€) per administration and increased to 371€ when travelling costs were included. Productivity costs added, the mean PI administration costs totalled 405€ for bortezomib and 437€ for carfilzomib. LIMITATIONS: The costing rationale of price tariffs may vary between hospital districts. Productivity costs were estimated conservatively, due to lack of data. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of intravenous or subcutaneous PIs to treat MM in healthcare facilities causes significant and potentially avoidable healthcare, travelling, and indirect costs, and they should be included in all health economic evaluations (HEEs). As the cost estimates utilized in this study represent most of central hospitals in the country, they provide useful information for future HEEs. A broader conclusion is that novel oral medications, such as the first oral PI, have a significant potential for reducing administration-related costs of subcutaneous or intravenous PIs.

Economic evaluation of sequential treatments for follicular non-hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: The cost-effectiveness analyses of follicular lymphoma (FL) treatments have focused on the second-line rituximab maintenance in patients with relapsed FL. The assessment of full FL treatment chain has been lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of FL treatment sequences. METHODS: Transitions between progression-free first-line treatment (PF1), progression-free second-line treatment (PF2), progression, and death health states were simulated with a probabilistic Markov model with half-cycle correction. At first, patients were assumed to be receiving rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (RCHOP) induction. The first-line RCHOP induction responders continued without (RCHOP) or with (RCHOPR) the first-line rituximab-maintenance treatment. In the case of PF1 failure, patients received RCOPR/bendamustine or RCOPR/COP according to the European Society for Medical Oncology guidance. In the case of PF2 failure, patients were expected to receive the best supportive care (BSC). The survivals and adverse events were estimated with direct and indirect comparisons. Health outcomes and Finnish payer (drug, drug administration, monitoring, test, progression, serious adverse event) costs valued in 2010 euros were discounted with 3% per annum. RESULTS: The mean discounted lifetime overall survival with FL was 9.6 to 11.5 years, quality-adjusted survival was 7.2 to 8.8 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), progression-free time was 7.7 to 10.2 years, and costs were €153,425 to €168,549, depending on the treatment sequence. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for RCHOPR→RCOPR/bendamustine→BSC, RCHOPR→RCOPR/COP→BSC, and RCHOP→RCOPR/bendamustine→BSC were €9575/€8014/€5900, €9881/€8310/€6013, and €8812/€7194/€5808, respectively, per QALY/life-year/progression-free year gained in comparison with RCHOP→RCOPR/COP→BSC. According to the cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier, the treatment of 61.8% to 72.7% patients with RCHOPR→RCOPR/bendamustine→BSC was cost effective at €20,000 to €30,000/QALY gained (expected value of perfect information [EVPI], €1287 to €1976/patient). The relative results were found to be robust in sensitivity analyses, and, in the direct comparison that included only head-to-head data, the first-line rituximab maintenance had 93.1% cost-effectiveness probability at €20,000/QALY gained (EVPI, €282/patient). CONCLUSION: Sequences that included first-line rituximab maintenance is and second-line bendamustine are potentially cost effective in the treatment of FL. LIMITATIONS: Because of data available, health outcomes of the first-line rituximab induction were excluded, the second-line patients on COP were assumed to incur the cost of COP, and the efficacy and adverse events of CHOP and the efficacy and adverse events of bendamustine were estimated indirectly according to a comparison of rituximab+bendamustine and RCHOP, and treatment benefits were truncated.