Chemotherapy-based versus chemotherapy-free stem cell mobilization (± plerixafor) in multiple myeloma patients: an Italian cost-effectiveness analysis.

Given the availability and efficacy of the mobilizing agent plerixafor in augmenting hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), there is a strong case for comparing the cost-effectiveness of mobilization with G-CSF + cyclophosphamide versus G-CSF alone. This study investigated the cost and effectiveness (i.e., successful 4 million-CD34+ collection) of G-CSF alone versus high-dose cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2) + G-CSF mobilization (± on-demand plerixafor) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eligible for autograft in Italy. A decision tree-supported cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) model in MM patients was developed from the societal perspective. The CEA model compared G-CSF alone with cyclophosphamide 4 g/m2 + G-CSF (± on-demand plerixafor) and was populated with demographic, healthcare and non-healthcare resource utilization data collected from a questionnaire administered to six Italian oncohematologists. Costs were expressed in Euro (€) 2019. The CEA model showed that G-CSF alone was strongly dominant versus cyclophosphamide + G-CSF ( ± on-demand plerixafor), with incremental savings of €1198.59 and an incremental probability of a successful 4 million-CD34+ apheresis (+0.052). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base-case results. In conclusion, chemotherapy-free mobilization (± on-demand plerixafor) is a "good value for money" option for MM patients eligible for autograft.

The costs of mobilisation and collection of peripheral blood stem cells in multiple myeloma and lymphoma in an European country: results from The Gruppo Italiano Trapianto Midollo Osseo (GITMO) and Società Italiana di Emaferesi e Manipolazione Cellulare (SIdEM) survey.

Scarce information is available about the cost of mobilisation/collection of peripheral blood stem cells for patients undergoing autologous transplant for relapsed Lymphoma or Multiple Myeloma. This paper reports the consumption of resources and costs collected through a survey among Italian Centres who adhere to the GITMO and SIdEM scientific societies. General transplant information was extracted from the European Promise database. Resources used alongside the phases of mobilisation/collection were retrieved. Resources for each of the process phases were quantified and averaged across centres and a unit cost value was attributed, based on administrative data from 3 centres, tariffs and market values. 25/89 Centres (34% of 2009 Promise transplants) provided data according to their standard practice. The mean cost/patient of the process of cell mobilisation/collection was € 6830 ± 1802 for Multiple Myeloma and € 7304 ± 1542 for Lymphoma. The organisational path for PBSC mobilisation/collection appears complex and cumbersome, spread amongst different treatment settings, with many different healthcare professionals being involved and considerable amounts of time and resources being currently dedicated to the management of patients requiring autologous transplantation.

Reduction of allogeneic red blood cell usage during cardiac surgery by an integrated intra- and postoperative blood salvage strategy: results of a randomized comparison.

BACKGROUND: The amount of allogeneic blood transfusion may relate to worse outcome in cardiac surgery. The reinfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) lost by patients, including those of chest drains, is a promising strategy to minimize allogeneic transfusions. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: To verify this hypotheis, 1047 cardiac surgery patients were randomly assigned to either traditional intraoperative blood salvage followed by chest drain insertion or intra- and postoperative strategy with the Haemonetics cardioPAT system. Allogeneic RBC transfusion rate (primary endpoint) and postoperative complications (secondary endpoint) were recorded at the time of discharge from the hospital and at first month follow-up visit, respectively. RESULTS: The cardioPAT arm received 1.20 units of allogeneic RBCs per patient, whereas the control group required 2.11 units per patient, and this difference proved to be highly significant (p=0.02). We observed a comparable 45-day mortality rate but a lower rate of deep vein thrombosis (p=0.04) and atrial fibrillation (p=0.04) in the cardioPAT arm. DISCUSSION: A significant reduction in patient exposure to allogeneic RBCs was observed in the cardioPAT system arm. Complications were slightly less frequent in the cardioPAT group. The use of the cardioPAT is a safe and effective strategy to reduce allogeneic RBC transfusions in cardiac surgery.