Quality of life and cost-effectiveness of convalescent plasma compared to standard care for hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the CONCOR-1 trial.

BACKGROUND: The CONvalescent Plasma for Hospitalized Adults With COVID-19 Respiratory Illness (CONCOR-1) trial was a multicenter randomized controlled trial assessing convalescent plasma in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of convalescent plasma and its impact on quality-of-life to provide insight into its potential as an alternative treatment in resource-constrained settings. METHODS: Individual patient data on health outcomes and resource utilization from the CONCOR-1 trial were used to conduct the analysis from the Canadian public payer's perspective with a time horizon of 30 days post-randomization. Baseline and 30-day EQ-5D-5L were measured to calculate quality-adjusted survival. All costs are presented in 2021 Canadian dollars. The base case assessed the EQ-5D-5L scores of hospitalized inpatients reporting at both timepoints, and a utility score of 0 was assigned for patients who died within 30 days. Costs for all patients enrolled were used. The sensitivity analysis utilizes EQ-5D-5L scores from the same population but only uses costs from this population. RESULTS: 940 patients were randomized: 627 received CCP and 313 received standard care. The total costs were $28,716 (standard deviation, $25,380) and $24,258 ($22,939) for the convalescent plasma and standard care arms respectively. EQ-5D-5L scores were 0.61 in both arms (p = .85) at baseline. At 30 days, EQ-5D-5L scores were 0.63 and 0.64 for patients in the convalescent plasma and standard care arms, respectively (p = .46). The incremental cost was $4458 and the incremental quality-adjusted life day was -0.078. DISCUSSION: Convalescent plasma was less effective and more costly than standard care in treating hospitalized COVID-19.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish: the challenges of preoperative anaemia management.

The timely correction of anaemia before major surgery is important for optimising perioperative patient outcomes. However, multiple barriers have precluded the global expansion of preoperative anaemia treatment programmes, including misconceptions about the true cost/benefit ratio for patient care and health system economics. Institutional investment and buy-in from stakeholders could lead to significant cost savings through avoided complications of anaemia and red blood cell transfusions, and through containment of direct and variable costs of blood bank laboratories. In some health systems, billing for iron infusions could generate revenue and promote growth of treatment programmes. The aim of this work is to galvanise integrated health systems worldwide to diagnose and treat anaemia before major surgery.

The strengths and weaknesses of viscoelastic testing compared to traditional coagulation testing.

Optimized acute bleeding management requires timely and reliable laboratory testing to detect and diagnose coagulopathies and guide transfusion therapy. Conventional coagulation tests (CCT) are inexpensive with minimal labor requirements, but CCTs may have delayed turnaround times. In addition, abnormal CCT values may not reflect in vivo coagulopathies that require treatment and may lead to overtransfusion. The use of viscoelastic testing (VET) has been rapidly expanding and is recommended by several recent bleeding guidelines. This review is intended to compare CCT to VET, review the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches, and evaluate and summarize the clinical studies that compared CCT-based and VET-based transfusion algorithms. Most studies of CCT vs VET transfusion algorithms favor the use of VET in the management of massively bleeding patients due to reductions in blood product utilization, bleeding, costs, and lengths of stay.

The impact of Daratumumab on transfusion service costs.

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab (DARA) is a human IgG1κ monoclonal antibody directed against CD38, approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma. As CD38 is expressed on RBCs, DARA can interfere with pretransfusion testing. DARA interference can be negated by denaturation of CD38 on RBCs with dithiothreitol (DTT) reagents. Because of this interference in pretransfusion testing, our hospital implemented a notification and testing/transfusion algorithm (NATTA) for pretransfusion testing and RBC product provision for DARA patients. This standardized approach combines DTT-based testing with selective genotyping and the provision of phenotypically similar RBCs for patients with clinically significant antibodies. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We evaluated pretransfusion test results and transfusion requirements for 91 DARA patients in an academic medical center over 1 year to determine the incremental cost of pretransfusion testing and RBC selection. The actual costs for the NATTA approach were compared to a theoretical approach using universal genotyping with a provision of phenotypically similar RBC transfusions. RESULTS: The annual cost of testing related to DARA after NATTA implementation was $535.76 per patient. The simulated annual cost for the alternative genotyping with provision of phenotypically similar RBC transfusions approach was $934.83 per patient. CONCLUSION: In our entire cohort of DARA patients, a DTT-based testing algorithm with selective genotyping and provision of phenotypically similar RBCs only for patients with clinically significant antibodies was less expensive than a simulated model of universal genotyping and provision of phenotypically similar RBCs.

Economic aspects of intraoperative coagulation management targeting higher fibrinogen concentrations during major craniosynostosis surgery.

BACKGROUND: Results of a previously published study demonstrated a significant decrease in transfusion requirements and calculated blood loss for pediatric major craniosynostosis surgery, if a ROTEM(®) FIBTEM trigger of <13 mm (early substitution group) was applied as compared to a trigger of <8 mm (conventional group). The aim of this study was a posthoc analysis of the costs for this coagulation management. METHODS: The total volume as well as the number of units or bags for all transfused blood products and coagulation factors were recorded for each case. The number of laboratory and point-of-care coagulation tests was also analyzed. Total blood product costs were calculated according to the local prices per unit. RESULTS: The total cost for all transfused/administered blood products/coagulation factors per patient was a median of 1023EUR (IQR 850EUR-1058EUR) in the early substitution group as compared to a median of 910EUR (IQR 719EUR-1351EUR) in the conventional group (P = 0.81). No difference in the number of coagulation tests performed was observed. CONCLUSION: In this study, the use of a higher fibrinogen trigger was not linked to a significant increase in total costs for transfused blood products and coagulation factors, and may offer an economically equivalent approach to coagulation management.

Cost-effectiveness of blood donor screening for Babesia microti in endemic regions of the United States.

BACKGROUND: Babesia microti is the leading reported cause of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-transmitted infection in the United States. Donor screening assays are in development. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A decision analytic model estimated the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies for preventing transfusion-transmitted babesiosis (TTB) in a hypothetical cohort of transfusion recipients in Babesia-endemic areas of the United States. Strategies included: 1) no screening; 2) Uniform Donor Health History Questionnaire (UDHQ), "status quo"; 3) recipient risk targeting using donor antibody and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) screening; 4) universal endemic donor antibody screening; and 5) universal endemic donor antibody and PCR screening. Outcome measures were TTB cases averted, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; $/QALY). We assumed a societal willingness to pay of $1 million/QALY based on screening for other transfusion-transmitted infections. RESULTS: Compared to no screening, the UDHQ avoids 0.02 TTB cases per 100,000 RBC transfusions at an ICER of $160,000/QALY whereas recipient risk-targeted strategy using antibody/PCR avoids 1.62 TTB cases per 100,000 RBC transfusions at an ICER of $713,000/QALY compared to the UDHQ. Universal endemic antibody screening avoids 3.39 cases at an ICER of $760,000/QALY compared to the recipient risk-targeted strategy. Universal endemic antibody/PCR screening avoids 3.60 cases and has an ICER of $8.8 million/QALY compared to universal endemic antibody screening. Results are sensitive to blood donor Babesia prevalence, TTB transmission probability, screening test costs, risk and severity of TTB complications, and impact of babesiosis diagnosis on donor quality of life. CONCLUSION: Antibody screening for Babesia in endemic regions is appropriate from an economic perspective based on the societal willingness to pay for preventing infectious threats to blood safety.