Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cancer Med ; 12(23): 21480-21489, 2023 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37942566

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Daratumumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of adult patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Subcutaneous (SC) formulation proved to be non-inferior in comparison with intravenous (IV) administration route. This study aimed at assessing the economic and time impact associated with the use of SC versus IV daratumumab in patients with RRMM from the perspective of the hematology center. METHODS: This was a 5-month multicenter time-and-motion cross-sectional micro-costing study conducted in three Italian hematology centers among adult patients diagnosed with RRMM with ongoing treatment with IV or SC daratumumab. Measurements were performed by an ad hoc App. RESULTS: Nineteen (20%) IV and 76 (80%) SC administration procedures were measured. Patients spent a mean of 4.85 ± 0.91 or 1.08 ± 0.56 h in the hematology center to receive IV or SC daratumumab, respectively. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) spent a mean of 49.38 ± 16.13 and 20.37 ± 7.88 min of active working time to manage IV and SC administrations, respectively. The infusion chair was occupied for a mean of 4.85 ± 0.91 and 0.99 ± 0.55 h during IV or SC administration, respectively. On average, considering the costs due to HCP and chair time, materials, and overhead costs, every IV and SC administration costed €80.33 and 34.90, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, as compared with IV administration, SC daratumumab was associated with 78%, 59%, 80% savings in terms of patient time, HCP active working time, and infusion chair, respectively, and 56.6% budget savings.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Monoclonais , Mieloma Múltiplo , Adulto , Humanos , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Estudos Transversais , Itália , Mieloma Múltiplo/tratamento farmacológico
2.
J. appl. oral sci ; 30: e20220148, 2022. tab, graf
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1405382

RESUMO

Abstract There are many glass ionomer cements available on the Brazilian market for Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART), however, there is still a gap in the literature regarding their cost-effectiveness. Objectives To evaluate the influence of restorative materials (Ketac Molar, 3M ESPE; and Vitro Molar, Nova DFL) in the two-year survival rate and cost-effectiveness of occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. Methodology A total of 117 children (aged four to eight years) with at least one occluso-proximal carious lesion in primary molars were selected and randomly divided in treatment groups (KM or VM) in this parallel randomized controlled trial. Treatments followed ART premises and were conducted in public schools by trained operators in Barueri, Brazil. A trained, calibrated, and blinded examiner performed the evaluations after two, six, 12, and 24 months (k=0.92). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate restoration survival and Cox regression was used to test the association with clinical factors (α=5%). For cost analysis, material and professional costs were considered. Monte Carlo analysis was used to generate a cost-effectiveness plane and bootstrapping was used to compare material costs over the years. Results The overall survival rate was 36.9% after two years (48.6% for KM and 25.4% for VM). Restorations with VM failed more than those with KM (HR=1.70; 95% CI=1.06-2.73; p=0.027). VM presented lower initial cost, but no difference was observed between groups considering the two-year incremental cost. Conclusion After a two-year evaluation, KM proved to be a better option than VM for occluso-proximal ART restorations in primary molars. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02267720

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA