Health Economic Aspects of Platelet Concentrates: Comparing Cost and Reimbursement of Pathogen Inactivated and Conventional Platelet Concentrates in a German Comprehensive Cancer Center.

INTRODUCTION: Pathogen inactivation (PI) utilizing amotosalen and UVA light (INTERCEPT® Blood System) is a well-established method for the production of safer platelet concentrates (PCs). While many studies describe clinical and logistical benefits of PI, the implications and potential challenges from a hospital management perspective have not yet been analyzed - health economic analyses considering reimbursement of PI are lacking. The objective of this analysis was to examine the real-life inpatient treatment costs from a hospital perspective and to assess the economic impact of PI-PC versus conventional PC (CONV-PC) administration in Germany. METHODS: Real-life cost data for inpatient cancer cases from 2020 of the University Hospital Cologne were identified by operating and procedure codes. The German diagnosis-related groups, extra fees, case mix index (CMI), length of stay (LOS), and average resource consumption of PC were evaluated from a micro-management perspective. The potential economic impact of implementing PI-treated PCs was modeled retrospectively. RESULTS: In total, 951 inpatient cases were analyzed (CMI [median 4.7-9.9], LOS [median 26 days], number of cases in intensive care units [38%]). The median DRG fee was between EUR 13,800 and EUR 26,400. According to our model, the use of PI-PC compared to CONV-PC would result in savings between EUR 184 and EUR 306 per case. CONCLUSION: From a hospital management perspective, oncological cases requiring PC transfusion are associated with a high CMI (reimbursement per DRG flat fee) and moderate costs with sufficient add-on payment for PI on a case level. Investment and process costs for PI implementation can be analyzed for site-specific scenarios.

Clinical and pharmacoeconomic evaluation of antifungal prophylaxis with continuous micafungin in patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation: A six-year cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (aSCT) are at high risk to develop an invasive fungal disease (IFD). Optimisation of antifungal prophylaxis strategies may improve patient outcomes and reduce treatment costs. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the clinical and economical impact of using continuous micafungin as antifungal prophylaxis. PATIENTS/METHODS: We performed a single-centre evaluation comparing patients who received either oral posaconazole with micafungin as intravenous bridging as required (POS-MIC) to patients who received only micafungin (MIC) as antifungal prophylaxis after aSCT. Epidemiological, clinical and direct treatment cost data extracted from the Cologne Cohort of Neutropenic Patients (CoCoNut) were analysed. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirteen patients (97 and 216 patients in the POS-MIC and MIC groups, respectively) were included into the analysis. In the POS-MIC and MIC groups, median overall length of stay was 42 days (IQR: 35-52 days) vs 40 days (IQR: 35-49 days; p = .296), resulting in median overall costs of €42,964 (IQR: €35,040-€56,348) vs €43,291 (IQR: €37,281 vs €51,848; p = .993), respectively. Probable/proven IFD in the POS-MIC and MIC groups occurred in 5 patients (5%) vs 3 patients (1%; p = .051), respectively. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed improved outcome of patients in the MIC group at day 100 (p = .037) and day 365 (p < .001) following aSCT. CONCLUSIONS: Our study results demonstrate improved outcomes in the MIC group compared with the POS-MIC group, which can in part be explained by a tendency towards less probable/proven IFD. Higher drug acquisition costs of micafungin did not translate into higher overall costs.