Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Association between oral targeted cancer drug net health benefit, uptake, and spending.
Lau-Min, Kelsey S; Wu, Yaxin; Rochester, Shavon; Bekelman, Justin E; Kanter, Genevieve P; Getz, Kelly D.
Afiliación
  • Lau-Min KS; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
  • Wu Y; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Rochester S; Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Bekelman JE; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Kanter GP; Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
  • Getz KD; Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 116(9): 1479-1486, 2024 Sep 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38745430
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Targeted cancer drugs (TCDs) have revolutionized oncology but vary in clinical benefit and patient out-of-pocket (OOP) costs. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Value Framework uses survival, toxicity, and symptom palliation data to quantify the net health benefit (NHB) of cancer drugs. We evaluated associations between NHB, uptake, and spending on oral TCDs.

METHODS:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 18-64 years with an incident oral TCD pharmacy claim in 2012-2020 in a nationwide deidentified commercial claims dataset. TCDs were categorized as having high (>60), medium (40-60), and low (<40) NHB scores. We plotted the uptake of TCDs by NHB category and used standard descriptive statistics to evaluate patient OOP and total spending. Generalized linear models evaluated the relationship between spending and TCD NHB, adjusted for cancer indication.

RESULTS:

We included 8524 patients with incident claims for 8 oral TCDs with 9 first-line indications in advanced melanoma, breast, lung, and pancreatic cancer. Medium- and high-NHB TCDs accounted for most TCD prescriptions. Median OOP spending was $18.78 for the first 28-day TCD supply (interquartile range [IQR] = $0.00-$87.57); 45% of patients paid $0 OOP. Median total spending was $10 118.79 (IQR = $6365.95-$10 600.37) for an incident 28-day TCD supply. Total spending increased $1083.56 for each 10-point increase in NHB score (95% confidence interval = $1050.27 to $1116.84, P < .01 for null hypothesis H0 = $0).

CONCLUSION:

Low-NHB TCDs were prescribed less frequently than medium- and high-NHB TCDs. Total spending on oral TCDs was high and positively associated with NHB. Commercially insured patients were largely shielded from high OOP spending on oral TCDs.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Gastos en Salud / Neoplasias / Antineoplásicos Límite: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: J Natl Cancer Inst Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Gastos en Salud / Neoplasias / Antineoplásicos Límite: Adolescent / Adult / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged País/Región como asunto: America do norte Idioma: En Revista: J Natl Cancer Inst Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos