Real-world total cost of care by line of therapy in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

AIMS: There are multiple recently approved treatments and a lack of clear standard-of-care therapies for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). While total cost of care (TCC) by the number of lines of therapy (LoTs) has been evaluated, more recent cost estimates using real-world data are needed. This analysis assessed real-world TCC of R/R DLBCL therapies by LoT using the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database (1 January 2015-31 December 2021), in US patients aged ≥18 years treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) or an R-CHOP-like regimen as first-line therapy. METHODS: Treatment costs and resources in the R/R setting were assessed by LoT. A sensitivity analysis identified any potential confounding of the results caused by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare utilization and costs. Overall, 310 patients receiving a second- or later-line treatment were included; baseline characteristics were similar across LoTs. Inpatient costs represented the highest percentage of total costs, followed by outpatient and pharmacy costs. RESULTS: Mean TCC per-patient-per-month generally increased by LoT ($40,604, $48,630, and $59,499 for second-, third- and fourth-line treatments, respectively). Costs were highest for fourth-line treatment for all healthcare resource utilization categories. Sensitivity analysis findings were consistent with the overall analysis, indicating results were not confounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. LIMITATIONS: There was potential misclassification of LoT; claims data were processed through an algorithm, possibly introducing errors. A low number of patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients who switched insurance plans, had insurance terminated, or whose enrollment period met the end of data availability may have had truncated follow-up, potentially resulting in underestimated costs. CONCLUSION: Total healthcare costs increased with each additional LoT in the R/R DLBCL setting. Further improvements of first-line treatments that reduce the need for subsequent LoTs would potentially lessen the economic burden of DLBCL.

US cost-effectiveness analysis of polatuzumab vedotin in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

AIMS: We evaluated the pharmacoeconomic value of polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) versus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-state partitioned survival model was used to estimate life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and cost impacts of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP. Analyses utilized mixture-cure survival modelling, assessed a lifetime horizon, discounted all outcomes at 3% per year, and examined both payer and societal perspectives. Progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), drug utilization, treatment duration, adverse reactions, and subsequent treatment inputs were based on data from the POLARIX study (NCT03274492). Costs included drug acquisition/administration, adverse reaction management, routine care, subsequent treatments, end-of-life care, and work productivity. RESULTS: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP were $70,719/QALY gained and $88,855/QALY gained from societal and payer perspectives, respectively. The $32,824 higher total cost of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP was largely due to higher drug costs ($122,525 vs $27,694), with cost offsets including subsequent treatment (-$52,765), routine care (-$1,781), end-of-life care (-$383), and work productivity (-$8,418). Pola-R-CHP resulted in an increase of 0.47 LYs and 0.46 QALYs versus R-CHOP. Pola-R-CHP was cost-effective in 60.9% and 58.0% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY gained from societal and payer perspectives, respectively. LIMITATIONS: There was uncertainty around the OS extrapolation in the model, and costs were derived from different sources. Recommended prophylactic medications were not included; prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for all patients was assumed to be equal across treatment arms in POLARIX. Work productivity loss was estimated from a general population and was not specific to patients with DLBCL. CONCLUSION: Pola-R-CHP was projected to be cost-effective versus R-CHOP in previously untreated DLBCL, suggesting that Pola-R-CHP represents good value relative to R-CHOP in this setting.

Cost of Disease Progression in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma After Frontline Treatment With Rituximab Plus Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, novel agents have become available to treat relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); the impact of such agents on treatment costs has not been formally studied. We present results from 2 independent, retrospective, real-world cohort analyses to determine the cost of disease progression after first-line rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analyses were conducted using the IQVIA PharMetricsⓇ Plus claims database and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry-Medicare-linked database (SEER-Medicare) and included patients ≥18 years and ≥66 years, respectively. "No progression" was defined as no second-line therapy for ≥2 years after the end of first-line R-CHOP and "treated progression" as initiating a second-line therapy within 2 years following the end of first-line R-CHOP. Analyses were adjusted for baseline covariates, and per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs were compared between progressors and nonprogressors. RESULTS: The IQVIA PharMetrics Plus analysis (January 1, 2010-June 30, 2018) included 871 patients (nonprogressors, n = 725; progressors, n = 146), including 10 patients who received chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Treated progression was associated with significantly higher adjusted PPPM costs than no progression ($10,554 vs. $1561, P < .001). The SEER-Medicare analysis (January 1, 2010-December 31, 2017) included 4099 patients (nonprogressors, n = 3389; progressors, n = 710), including 12 patients receiving CAR-T. Treated progression was associated with significantly higher adjusted PPPM costs than no progression ($10,928 vs. $2902, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Treated progression of DLBCL increases adjusted PPPM costs by over $8000 compared with no progression.

Cost-effectiveness of obinutuzumab versus rituximab biosimilars for previously untreated follicular lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized phase 3 GALLIUM trial, first-line treatment with obinutuzumab (GA101; G) plus chemotherapy (G + chemo) resulted in superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with rituximab plus chemotherapy (R + chemo) for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL). G + chemo was found to be cost-effective when compared with R + chemo (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] of approximately $2,300 per quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] gained). Two rituximab biosimilars, rituximab-abbs (Ra) and rituximab-pvvr (Rp), have been approved by the FDA for use in this setting. However, the cost-effectiveness of G + chemo versus Ra + chemo and Rp + chemo has not yet been estimated. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of G + chemo versus Ra + chemo and Rp + chemo in the first-line treatment of FL. METHODS: We adapted an existing Markov model that compared G + chemo with R + chemo, using investigator-assessed PFS and postprogression survival data from the GALLIUM trial to model overall survival. All patients in the study received induction chemoimmunotherapy with either G + chemo or R + chemo, with responders then receiving obinutuzumab or rituximab maintenance therapy for 2 years or until disease progression. We assumed that the efficacy and safety of the rituximab biosimilars plus chemotherapy were the same as the R + chemo arm of the GALLIUM study. Drug utilization and treatment duration were also derived from GALLIUM. Health care costs were based on Medicare reimbursements, and drug costs were average sale prices for intravenous therapies or wholesale acquisition costs for oral therapies used after progression. Utility estimates were based on the GALLIUM trial data and published literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the key drivers of the model and uncertainty in the results. Results: Treatment with G + chemo led to an increase of 0.93 QALYs relative to rituximab biosimilars plus chemotherapy (95% credible range [CR] = 0.36-1.46). The total cost of G + chemo was $191,317, whereas the total costs of Ra + chemo and Rp + chemo were $164,340 (Δ14.1%) and $169,755 (Δ11.3%), respectively, with G + chemo resulting in incremental costs of $26,978 (95% CR = $19,781-$33,119) and $21,562 (95% CR = $14,473-$28,389), respectively. The incremental total drug and administration costs were $32,678 (Δ25.4%) and $27,263 (Δ21.2%) for G + chemo versus Ra + chemo and G + chemo versus Rp + chemo, respectively. There were cost savings of $7,050 (Δ-12.4%) related to disease progression for G + chemo ($56,727) compared with Ra + chemo and Rp + chemo ($63,777). ICERs were $28,879 and $23,082 per QALY gained for G + chemo versus Ra + chemo and Rp + chemo, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, G + chemo was cost-effective at the $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY thresholds versus both Ra + chemo (88% and 98% probabilities of cost-effectiveness, respectively) and Rp + chemo (93% and 98%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: G + chemo is projected to be cost-effective versus rituximab biosimilars plus chemotherapy in the United States as first-line treatment for FL, driven by increased QALYs for G + chemo and cost savings from delayed disease progression. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Genentech, a member of the Roche Group. The study sponsor was involved in study design, data interpretation, and writing of the report. All authors approved the decision to submit the report for publication. Spencer and Guzauskas report fees from Genentech during the conduct of the study. Felizzi was employed by F. Hoffmann-La Roche at the time this study was conducted; Launonen is an employees of F. Hoffmann-La Roche. Felizzi and Launonen previously had share ownership in Novartis. Dawson and Masaquel are employees of Genentech, and they have stock options in F. Hoffmann-La Roche. Veenstra reports fees from Genentech, during the conduct of this study and outside of the submitted work. This work was presented, in part, at the AACR Virtual Meeting Advances in Malignant Lymphoma meeting (virtual; August 17-19, 2020) and the SOHO annual meeting (virtual; September 9-12, 2020).

US cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin, bendamustine and rituximab in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Aim: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of polatuzumab vedotin (pola) + bendamustine + rituximab (BR) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma based on the GO29365 trial from a US payer's perspective. Materials & methods: A partitioned survival model used progression-free survival and overall survival data from the GO29365 trial. The base case analysis assumed overall survival was informed by progression-free survival; a mixture cure model estimated proportion of long-term survivors. Results: In the base case, pola + BR was cost-effective versus BR at US$35,864 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses showed that the findings were robust. Conclusion: Pola + BR is cost-effective versus BR for the treatment of transplant-ineligible relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the US.

Obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy followed by obinutuzumab monotherapy is cost-effective vs. rituximab plus chemotherapy followed by rituximab monotherapy for previously untreated follicular lymphoma patients in the United States.

The GALLIUM trial compared obinutuzumab (GA101, G)-based chemotherapy followed by G monotherapy (G + chemo) for up to two years to rituximab (R)-based chemotherapy followed by R monotherapy (R + chemo) for up to two years in previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) patients. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of G + chemo versus R + chemo utilizing GALLIUM trial data and published literature. G + chemo had increased drug costs (undiscounted: $135,200 versus $127,700 for R + chemo), representing a relative increase of 5.9%. However, this was offset by a $6,400 lower cost for disease progression. G + chemo led to increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) relative to R + chemo of 0.81 (95% credible range, [CR]: 0.22-1.37), and the overall discounted incremental cost was $1,900 (95% CR: -$7,400 to $8,900). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was ∼$2,300 per QALY gained, and the results were highly robust to sensitivity analyses. Treatment with G + chemo compared to R + chemo is cost-effective in previously untreated FL patients in the US.

Cost-effectiveness of obinutuzumab plus bendamustine followed by obinutuzumab monotherapy for the treatment of follicular lymphoma patients who relapse after or are refractory to a rituximab-containing regimen in the US.

AIMS: Obinutuzumab (GA101, G) was approved in February 2016 by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat follicular lymphoma (FL) patients who relapsed after, or are refractory to (R/R), a rituximab-containing regimen (R/R-rituximab). In the GADOLIN trial, R/R-rituximab patients who received G plus bendamustine (B) followed by G-monotherapy (G + B) for up to 2 years had significantly improved progression-free survival and overall survival compared to patients receiving B-monotherapy. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of G + B vs B-monotherapy for R/R-rituximab FL patients from a US payer perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient outcomes were simulated using a 3-state area under the curve model including progression-free survival, progressive disease, and death. This study used R/R-rituximab data from the National LymphoCare Study to extrapolate the GADOLIN trial's refractory FL progression-free and overall survival data to a R/R-rituximab FL population. Drug utilization and adverse events were based on trial data, and costs were based on Medicare reimbursements and drug wholesale acquisition costs in 2016. Utility estimates were derived from published literature. Post-progression treatment costs were based on observed post-progression therapies in GADOLIN. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess model uncertainty. RESULTS: G + B resulted in an increase in quality-adjusted life years relative to B-monotherapy of 1.24 (95% CR = 0.61-1.87); the incremental total cost was $58,100 (95% CR = $54,500-$61,500). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $47,000 per QALY gained, and, based on probabilistic simulations, there was a 98% probability that G + B was cost-effective at the $100,000 per QALY threshold. LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: This US-based analysis suggests that treatment with G + B compared to B-monotherapy is likely cost-effective in R/R-rituximab FL patients. Modeling a R/R-rituximab population based on a synthesis of GADOLIN and the National LymphoCare Study data introduces uncertainty in the analysis. However, the findings were robust to sensitivity analyses.

Does site-of-care for oncology infusion therapy influence treatment patterns, cost, and quality in the United States?

BACKGROUND: The increase in hospital acquisition of community oncology clinics in the US has led to a shift in the site-of-care (SOC) for infusion therapy from the physician office (PO) to the hospital outpatient (HO) setting. OBJECTIVE: To investigate differences by SOC in treatment patterns, quality, and cost among patients with cancer undergoing first-line infusion therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis identified adult patients from Humana medical claims who initiated infusion therapy from 2008-2012 for five common cancer types in which infusion therapy is likely, including early stage breast cancer; metastatic breast, lung, and colorectal cancers; and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Differences by SOC in first-line treatment patterns and quality of care at end-of-life, defined as infusions or hospitalizations 30 days prior to death, were evaluated using Wilcoxon-Rank Sum and Chi-square tests where appropriate. Differences in cost by SOC were evaluated using risk-adjusted generalized linear models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment patterns, quality of care at end of life, healthcare costs. RESULTS: There were differences in duration of therapy and number of infusions for some therapy regimens by SOC, in which patients in the HO had shorter duration of therapy and fewer infusions. There were no differences in quality of care at end-of-life by SOC. Total healthcare costs were 15% higher among patients in HO ($55,965) compared with PO ($48,439), p < .0001. LIMITATIONS: Analyses was restricted to a claims-based population of cancer patients within a health plan. CONCLUSION: This study, in an older, predominantly Medicare Advantage oncology cohort, found differences by SOC in treatment patterns and cost, but not quality. Where differences were found, patients receiving care in the HO had shorter duration of therapy and fewer infusions for specific treatment regimens, but higher healthcare costs than those treated in a PO.

Economic burden related to chemotherapy-related adverse events in patients with metastatic breast cancer in an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is treated with many different modalities, including chemotherapy that can be given as a single agent or in combination. Patients often experience adverse events from chemotherapy during the cycles of treatment which can lead to economic burden. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate costs related to chemotherapy-related adverse events in patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) in an integrated health care delivery system. METHODS: Patients with mBC newly initiated on chemotherapy were identified and the first infusion was defined as the index date. Patients were ≥18 years old at time of index date, had at least 6 months of health plan membership and drug eligibility prior to their index date. The chemotherapy adverse events were identified after the index date and during first line of chemotherapy. Episodes of care (EOC) were created using healthcare visits. Chart review was conducted to establish whether the adverse events were related to chemotherapy. Costs were calculated for each visit, including medications related to the adverse events, and aggregated to calculate the total EOC cost. RESULTS: A total of 1,682 patients with mBC were identified after applying study criteria; 54% of these patients had one or more adverse events related to chemotherapy. After applying the EOC method, there were a total of 5,475 episodes (4,185 single episodes [76.4%] and 1,290 multiple episodes [23.6%]) related to chemotherapy-related adverse events. Within single episodes, hematological (1,387 EOC, 33.1%), musculoskeletal/pain related (1,070 EOC, 25.6%), and gastrointestinal (775 EOC, 18.5%) were the most frequent adverse events. Patients with adverse events related to single EOC with anemia and neutropenia had the highest total outpatient costs with 901 EOC ($81,991) and 187 EOC ($17,017); these patients also had highest total inpatient costs with 46 EOC ($542,798) and 16 EOC ($136,768). However, within multiple episodes, hematological (420 EOC, 32.6%), followed by infections/pyrexia (335 EOC, 25.9%) and gastrointestinal (278 EOC, 22.6%) were the most frequent adverse events. CONCLUSION: The economic burden related to chemotherapy adverse events in patients with mBC is substantial.

The economic burden of end-of-life care in metastatic breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess end-of-life (EOL) total healthcare costs and resource utilization during the last 6 months of claims follow-up among patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who received systemic anti-neoplastic therapy. METHODS: Newly diagnosed females with MBC initiating treatment January 1, 2003-June 30, 2011 were identified in a large commercial claims database. Two cohorts were defined based on a proxy measure for EOL 1 month prior to the end of last recorded follow-up within the study period: patients who were assumed dead at end of claims follow-up (EOL cohort) and patients who were alive (no-end-of-life [NEOL] cohort). Proxy measures for EOL were obtained from published literature and clinical expert opinion. Cost and resource utilization were evaluated for the 6 months prior to end of claims follow-up. Baseline variables, resource utilization, and costs were compared between cohorts with univariate statistical tests. Adjusted relative risks were calculated for resource utilization measures. A covariate-adjusted generalized linear model evaluated 6-month total healthcare costs. RESULTS: Of the 3,878 females included, 18.5% (n = 718) met the criteria for EOL. Mean observational time (MBC onset to end of claims follow-up) was shorter for the EOL cohort (EOL, 32 months vs NEOL, 35 months; p < 0.001). In adjusted analyses, the EOL cohort had 4.15 times higher 6-month total healthcare costs (EOL, $72,112 vs NEOL, $17,137; p < 0.001). NEOL month-to-month mean total healthcare costs fluctuated between $2336-$3145, while EOL costs increased steadily from $8,956 in the sixth month prior to death to $19,326 in the last month of life. The adjusted relative risk of inpatient, hospice and emergency department utilization was >2 times higher in the EOL cohort (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Potential EOL presented a greater economic burden in the 6 months prior to death. EOL month-to-month costs increased precipitously in the last 2 months of life and were driven by acute inpatient care.

Adverse event-related costs for systemic metastatic breast cancer treatment among female Medicaid beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study compared the real-world incidence and costs of systemic treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in patients with metastatic breast cancer in a Medicaid population. METHODS: Insurance claims data for adult women who received biologic or chemotherapy (± hormonal therapy) for metastatic breast cancer between 2006-2013 were extracted from the Truven Health MarketScan® Multi-State Medicaid database. Incidence of AEs (per 100 person years) and average monthly AE-related healthcare costs (per-patient-per-month) during each line of therapy (first or later lines) were estimated. The association between AEs and total all-cause healthcare costs was estimated using multivariable regression. RESULTS: A total of 729 metastatic breast cancer patients were analyzed. Hematological (202.3 per 100 person years) and constitutional AEs (289.6 per 100 person years) were the most common class of AEs reported. Unadjusted per-patient-per-month AE-related expenditure by class were highest for hematological AEs ($1524), followed by gastrointestinal ($839) and constitutional AEs ($795), with anemia ($942), nausea/vomiting ($699), and leukopenia/neutropenia ($550) having incurred the highest total AE-related costs. Adjusted total all-cause monthly costs increased with the number of AEs ($19,701 for >7 AEs, $16,264 for 4 - 6 AEs, and $13,731 for 1 - 3 AEs) compared to no AEs ($5908) (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Among metastatic breast cancer patients treated with systemic therapy in a Medicaid population, AEs were associated with significant increases in costs, which increased with the number of AEs experienced. Therapies associated with a lower incidence of AEs may reduce cost burden and improve patient outcomes.

Estimated Life-Years Saved in Women with HER2-Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer Receiving First-Line Trastuzumab and Pertuzumab in the United States.

BACKGROUND: HER2 positive (HER2+) metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is associated with high mortality. Trastuzumab was approved for use in 1998, but the life-years saved from first-line use are unknown, as are the potential US population benefits from adding pertuzumab. OBJECTIVES: The first aim was to estimate the number of life-years saved by using first-line trastuzumab between 1999 and 2013 in HER2+ women with MBC. In addition, based on these estimates, the second aim was to project the life-years that could be saved by adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab in first-line therapy. METHODS: We constructed a simulation model accounting for incidence, testing rates, therapy utilization, and overall survival. The model was run for 1999 to 2013 (15 years) to estimate the life-years saved from using trastuzumab plus chemotherapy instead of chemotherapy alone. The model was also run from 2013 to 2027 (15 years) to project the life-years that might be saved by adding pertuzumab. Uncertainty was incorporated using Monte-Carlo methods. RESULTS: The estimated number of women with HER2+ MBC varied over time, with the peak of 9700 in 2005 and the low of 7700 in 2018. The cumulative incremental life-years saved because of first-line trastuzumab use from 1999 to 2013 was estimated to be 156,413 (95% simulation interval 114,840-195,201). The projection for pertuzumab from 2013 to 2027 was 137,959 (95% simulation interval 56,011-225,069). Exploratory analyses of value showed that pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy is associated with a $1.10 billion gain compared with chemotherapy alone, and adding pertuzumab is associated with a $0.06 billion gain compared with trastuzumab with chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: This simulation model suggests that substantial progress has been made in treating HER2+ women over the past 15 years, and the future may witness similar gains with the introduction of pertuzumab.

The Lifetime Economic Burden of Inaccurate HER2 Testing: Estimating the Costs of False-Positive and False-Negative HER2 Test Results in US Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with breast cancer whose tumors test positive for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) are treated with HER2-targeted therapies such as trastuzumab, but limitations with HER2 testing may lead to false-positive (FP) or false-negative (FN) results. OBJECTIVES: To develop a US-level model to estimate the effect of tumor misclassification on health care costs and patient quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). METHODS: Decision analysis was used to estimate the number of patients with early-stage breast cancer (EBC) whose HER2 status was misclassified in 2012. FP results were assumed to generate unnecessary trastuzumab costs and unnecessary cases of trastuzumab-related cardiotoxicity. FN results were assumed to save money on trastuzumab, but with a loss of QALYs and greater risk of disease recurrence and its associated costs. QALYs were valued at $100,000 under a net monetary benefit approach. RESULTS: Among 226,870 women diagnosed with EBC in 2012, 3.12% (n = 7,070) and 2.18% (n = 4,955) were estimated to have had FP and FN test results, respectively. Approximately 8400 QALYs (discounted, lifetime) were lost among women not receiving trastuzumab because of FN results. The estimated incremental per-patient lifetime burden of FP or FN results was $58,900 and $116,000, respectively. The implied incremental losses to society were $417 million and $575 million, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HER2 tests result in misclassification and nonoptimal treatment of approximately 12,025 US patients with EBC annually. The total economic societal loss of nearly $1 billion suggests that improvements in HER2 testing accuracy are needed and that further clinical and economic studies are warranted.

Assessment of HER2 testing patterns, HER2+ disease, and the utilization of HER2-directed therapy in early breast cancer.

CONTEXT: Determining human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status is critical for the management of early-stage breast cancer (ESBC). An understanding of HER2 testing practices can provide insight into how test results influence the use of HER2-directed therapy. OBJECTIVE: To assess HER2 testing, HER2+ disease, and HER2-directed therapy in ESBC at the Huntsman Cancer Institute before and after the 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology and College of American Pathologist (ASCO/CAP) guidelines on HER2 testing were published. METHODS: Patients were identified from an institutional tumor registry. HER2 testing patterns and results were examined using a chart review of pathology and clinical notes. Patient characteristics, HER2+ rate, and trastuzumab use were evaluated descriptively. Discordance rate with reflex testing (immunohistochemistry [IHC]2+ retested by fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH]) was also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 1,459 women were included (mean age: 57 years). The rate of HER2+ disease was 17% (number [N] =245). The discordance rate between IHC2+ and FISH was 10%. After the 2007 ASCO/CAP guidelines, fewer tumors were classified as IHC3+ (16% post- versus 21.9% pre-2007), more tumors were characterized as IHC2+ (26.4% post- versus 20.7% pre-2007), and the overall HER2+ rate was decreased (18.7% versus 21.9%), but this was not statistically significant (P=0.519). Most patients with HER2+ ESBC received HER2-targeted therapy (N=185). CONCLUSION: The HER2+ rate was 17% and within the range of the reported rates in the literature. Reflex testing identified additional HER2+ tumors by approximately 10%, and should be considered a potential quality indicator. ASCO/CAP HER2 testing guidelines in 2007 appeared to impact the interpretation and classification of HER2+ tumors.

Partial palivizumab prophylaxis and increased risk of hospitalization due to respiratory syncytial virus in a Medicaid population: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Infection with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is common among young children insured through Medicaid in the United States. Complete and timely dosing with palivizumab is associated with lower risk of RSV-related hospitalizations, but up to 60% of infants who receive palivizumab in Medicaid population do not receive full prophylaxis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of partial palivizumab prophylaxis with the risk of RSV hospitalization among high-risk Medicaid-insured infants. METHODS: Claims data from 12 states during 6 RSV seasons (October 1st to April 30th in the first year of life in 2003-2009) were analyzed. Inclusion criteria were birth hospital discharge before October 1st, continuous insurance eligibility from birth through April 30th, ≥ one palivizumab administration from August 1st to end of season, and high-risk status (≤34 weeks gestational age or chronic lung disease of prematurity [CLDP] or hemodynamically significant congenital heart disease [CHD]). Fully prophylaxed infants received the first palivizumab dose by November 30th with no gaps >35 days up to the first RSV-related hospitalization or end of follow-up. All other infants were categorized as partially prophylaxed. RESULTS: Of the 8,443 high-risk infants evaluated, 67% (5,615) received partial prophylaxis. Partially prophylaxed infants were more likely to have RSV-related hospitalization than fully prophylaxed infants (11.7% versus 7.9%, p< 0.001). RSV-related hospitalization rates ranged from 8.5% to 24.8% in premature, CHD, and CLDP infants with partial prophylaxis. After adjusting for potential confounders, logistic regression showed that partially prophylaxed infants had a 21% greater odds of hospitalization compared with fully prophylaxed infants (odds ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.34). CONCLUSIONS: RSV-related hospitalization rates were significantly higher in high-risk Medicaid infants with partial palivizumab prophylaxis compared with fully prophylaxed infants. These findings suggest that reduced and/or delayed dosing is less effective.

Comparison of treatment patterns and economic outcomes in metastatic breast cancer patients initiated on trastuzumab versus lapatinib: a retrospective analysis.

Few studies have compared treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and costs in patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) receiving HER2 directed therapy. This study evaluated these outcomes in patients receiving trastuzumab or lapatinib. Adult women with mBC, who were initiated on trastuzumab or lapatinib, on or after March 13, 2007, were selected from the US-based PharMetrics® Integrated Database (2000-2011). Patients were required to be continuously enrolled in their healthcare plan for ≥6 months prior to and ≥30 days following trastuzumab or lapatinib initiation. Trastuzumab or lapatinib discontinuation rates (defined as a gap ≥45 consecutive days) were compared using multivariate Cox proportional-hazards models. HRU and monthly healthcare cost differences were estimated using multivariate negative binomial regression models and generalized linear models, respectively. Among the 643 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 381 and 262 patients were included in the trastuzumab and lapatinib groups, respectively. The majority of the 262 patients receiving lapatinib previously received trastuzumab (N = 171 [65.3%]). After adjustment for potential confounders, when compared to trastuzumab patients, lapatinib patients had a higher rate of treatment discontinuation (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.57; P < 0.001), a higher rate of outpatient visits (not treatment administration related) (IRR = 1.19; P < 0.004), and a lower rate of medical visits associated with treatment administration (IRR = 0.34; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in total monthly healthcare costs ($11,920 vs. $11,898 for trastuzumab and lapatinib patients, respectively; P = 0.451). Findings from our study show that, irrespective of the treatment initiated at index date, disease management in patients with mBC is associated with similar and substantial healthcare costs. Any differences in specific components of healthcare costs were associated with differences in the mode of treatment administration. Approximately 50% of all costs were non-drug related, and future studies should focus on how these costs may be controlled, regardless of mode of treatment administration.

Identification and cost of adverse events in metastatic breast cancer in taxane and capecitabine based regimens.

PURPOSE: We sought to compare the economic impact of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in patients with metastatic breast cancer (mBC) using taxane- or capecitabine-based treatment regimens as either first- or second-line (FL or SL) therapy in the US. METHODS: We used healthcare claims data from the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan® Commercial Databases to conduct a retrospective cohort study comparing the economic impact of AEs amongst taxane- and capecitabine-treated mBC patients in the US. We selected women diagnosed with mBC between 2008-2010 who received a taxane or capecitabine as first- or second-line (FL or SL) chemotherapy. Costs related to hospitalization, outpatient services, emergency department visits, chemotherapy and other medications were tabulated and combined to determine total healthcare costs. The incremental monthly costs associated with the presence of AEs compared to no AEs were estimated using generalized linear models, controlling for age and Charlson Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: We identified 15,443 mBC patients meeting inclusion criteria. Adjusted total monthly costs were significantly higher in those who experienced AEs than in those without AEs in both lines of treatment (FL incremental cost: taxanes $1,142, capecitabine $1,817; SL incremental cost: taxanes $1,448, capecitabine $4,437). Total costs increased with the number of AEs and were primarily driven by increased hospitalization amongst those with AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Adverse events in taxane- or capecitabine-treated mBC patients are associated with significant increases in costs. Selecting treatment options associated with fewer AEs may reduce costs and improve outcomes in these patients.

Cost utility of palivizumab prophylaxis among pre-term infants in the United States: a national policy perspective.

OBJECTIVE: The cost-effectiveness of palivizumab has previously been reported among certain guideline-eligible, high-risk premature infants in Medicaid. Because guideline authorities base decisions on a national perspective, the economic model of palivizumab was adapted to include all infants, that is, public and privately insured patients (60% of palivizumab use is public, 40% is private). METHODS: This study examined four groups of premature infants without chronic lung disease of prematurity or congenital heart disease: (1) <32 weeks gestational age (wGA) and ≤ 6 months chronologic age (CA); (2) 32-34 wGA, ≤ 3 months CA, with 2009 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) risk factors (RFs); (3) 32-35 wGA, ≤ 6 months CA, with 2006 AAP RFs; and (4) 32-35 wGA, ≤ 6 months CA, with ≤ 1 RF. An average estimate was used between public and private payors for (1) background rates of respiratory syncytial virus hospitalization (RSV-H), (2) direct medical costs associated with RSV-H, and (3) cost of palivizumab. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) are reported in cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: Palivizumab saved costs and improved QALYs among infants <32 wGA. Palivizumab was cost-effective in infants 32-34 wGA with 2009 AAP RFs ($44,774 per QALY) and in infants 32-35 wGA with 2006 AAP RFs ($79,477 per QALY). The ICER for infants 32-35 wGA with ≤ 1 RF was $464,476 per QALY. Influential variables in the sensitivity analysis included background rate of RSV-H and cost and efficacy of palivizumab. LIMITATIONS: The results are not generalizable to populations outside of the US. The model did not examine all RFs. The wholesale acquisition cost was used as a payment benchmark; actual price paid by end providers varies. CONCLUSIONS: From a national policy perspective, palivizumab remained cost-effective for publically and commercially insured, guideline-eligible, high-risk premature infants. Palivizumab was not cost-effective in infants of 32-35 wGA with ≤ 1 RF.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of palivizumab among pre-term infant populations covered by Medicaid in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Medicaid infants are at high risk of severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease. The study objective was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of palivizumab in a Medicaid population. METHODS: A societal cost-utility analysis was conducted of prophylaxis with palivizumab vs no prophylaxis among four groups of premature infants: (1) <32 weeks gestational age (wGA) and ≤ 6 months chronologic age (CA); (2) 32-34 wGA, ≤ 3 months CA with 2009 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) risk factors (RF); (3) 32-35 wGA, ≤ 6 months CA with 2006 AAP RF; and (4) 32-35 wGA, ≤ 6 months CA with ≤ 1 RF. Full dosing of palivizumab was assumed throughout the RSV season (consistent with the FDA-approved label). All costs were in 2010 US dollars. The societal public payer spend for palivizumab was estimated using Medicaid reimbursement methodologies for the top 10 palivizumab-using states in 2010 minus mandatory manufacturer rebates. This study reports the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Sensitivity and probabilistic analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: Palivizumab saved costs and improved QALYs among infants <32 wGA. Palivizumab was cost-effective in infants 32-34 wGA with 2009 AAP RF ($16,037 per QALY) and in infants 32-35 wGA with 2006 AAP RF ($38,244 per QALY). The ICER for infants 32-35 wGA with ≤ 1 RF was $281,892 per QALY. Influential variables in the sensitivity analysis included the background rate of RSV hospitalization, the cost of palivizumab, and the efficacy of palivizumab. KEY LIMITATIONS: These results are not generalizable to commercially insured infants or infants outside of the US. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first cost-utility analysis of palivizumab in a Medicaid population. Palivizumab, when dosed consistent with the FDA-approved labeling, was either cost-saving or cost-effective among current guideline-eligible infants in the Medicaid population. Palivizumab did not demonstrate cost-effectiveness in 32-35 wGA infants with ≤ 1 RF.