Trends in Clinical Benefits and Costs of Novel Therapeutics in AML: at What Price Does Progress Come?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Since 2017, eight novel agents have been approved for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the USA. Here, we review the clinical benefits and costs associated with these drugs. RECENT FINDINGS: For some of the newly-approved drugs, clinical benefit has been documented in randomized trials. Others received accelerated approval based on surrogate endpoints in early phase trials. All, however, carry significant costs and toxicities. Cost-effectiveness analyses are so far only available for midostaurin, CPX-351, and gemtuzumab ozogamicin. Recently approved drugs for AML have varying levels of evidence for clinical effectiveness and because of associated high costs may further increase the overall economic burden of AML care. This issue is complex and whether novel AML drugs will cost-effective will depend on multiple factors, including their ability to improve survival and quality of life while simultaneously reducing the costs of healthcare resource utilization.

Outpatient care of patients with acute myeloid leukemia: Benefits, barriers, and future considerations.

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who receive intensive induction or re-induction chemotherapy with curative intent typically experience prolonged cytopenias upon completion of treatment. Due to concerns regarding infection and bleeding risk as well as significant transfusion and supportive care requirements, patients have historically remained in the hospital until blood count recovery-a period of approximately 30 days. The rising cost of AML care has prompted physicians to reconsider this practice, and a number of small studies have suggested the safety and feasibility of providing outpatient supportive care to patients following intensive AML (re-) induction therapy. Potential benefits include a significant reduction of healthcare costs, improvement in quality of life, and decreased risk of hospital-acquired infections. In this article, we will review the currently available literature regarding this practice and discuss questions to be addressed in future studies. In addition, we will consider some of the barriers that must be overcome by institutions interested in implementing an "early discharge" policy. While outpatient management of selected AML patients appears safe, careful planning is required in order to provide the necessary support, education and rapid management of serious complications that occur among this very vulnerable patient population.

Resource Utilization and Safety of Outpatient Management Following Intensive Induction or Salvage Chemotherapy for Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Myelodysplastic Syndrome: A Nonrandomized Clinical Comparative Analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) typically remain hospitalized after induction or salvage chemotherapy until blood cell count recovery, with resulting prolonged inpatient stays being a primary driver of health care costs. Pilot studies suggest that outpatient management following chemotherapy might be safe and could reduce costs for these patients. OBJECTIVE: To compare safety, resource utilization, infections, and costs between adults discharged early following AML or MDS induction or salvage chemotherapy and inpatient controls. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, phase 2, single-center study conducted at the University of Washington Medical Center. Over a 43-month period (January 1, 2011, through July 31, 2014), 178 adults receiving intensive AML or MDS chemotherapy were enrolled. After completion of chemotherapy, 107 patients met predesignated medical and logistical criteria for early discharge, while 29 met medical criteria only and served as inpatient controls. INTERVENTIONS: Early-discharge patients were released from the hospital at the completion of chemotherapy, and supportive care was provided in the outpatient setting until blood cell count recovery (median, 21 days; range, 2-45 days). Controls received inpatient supportive care (median, 16 days; range, 3-42 days). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We analyzed differences in early mortality, resource utilization including intensive care unit (ICU) days, transfusions per study day, and use of intravenous (IV) antibiotics per study day), numbers of infections, and total and inpatient charges per study day among early-discharge patients vs controls. RESULTS: Four of the 107 early-discharge patients and none of the 29 control patients died within 30 days of enrollment (P=.58). Nine early-discharge patients (8%) but no controls required ICU-level care (P=.20). No differences were noted in the median daily number of transfused red blood cell units (0.27 vs 0.29; P=.55) or number of transfused platelet units (0.26 vs 0.29; P=.31). Early-discharge patients had more positive blood cultures (37 [35%] vs 4 [14%]; P=.04) but required fewer IV antibiotic days per study day (0.48 vs 0.71; P=.01). Overall, daily charges among early-discharge patients were significantly lower than for inpatients (median, $3840 vs $5852; P<.001) despite increased charges per inpatient day when readmitted (median, $7405 vs $5852; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Early discharge following intensive AML or MDS chemotherapy can reduce costs and use of IV antibiotics, but attention should be paid to complications that may occur in the outpatient setting.