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.

The clinical and economic burden of peripheral T-cell lymphoma: a systematic literature review.

Aim: To understand the burden of treatment-naive peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted in November 2020 following best practice methodology. Results: Fifty-five clinical studies were included, mostly investigating cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) or 'CHOP-like' regimens, with combination regimens showing similar effectiveness to CHOP alone. Aside from the combination of brentuximab vedotin + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone (A+CHP), other available treatments showed no statistically significant benefit over CHOP in terms of overall or progression-free survival in overall PTCL patients. The mean monthly cost per patient in the USA ranged from 6328 to US$9356 based on six studies. One economic evaluation demonstrated A+CHP to be a more cost-effective treatment option than CHOP. Conclusion: Further research is needed to understand the humanistic and cost impact of frontline treatment for PTCL and its specific subtypes.

Plain language summary Peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) is an aggressive cancer that develops from white blood cells called T cells, which are an important part of the immune system. There is limited knowledge on the impact PTCL has on patients and their families. This systematic review of 55 clinical studies was conducted to further understand how safe and effective current treatments are for patients with newly diagnosed PTCL, how these treatments and disease impact their quality of life, and the economic impact of treatment and disease. Chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone [CHOP]) was the most commonly studied regimen, but had limited effectiveness and a notable side effect profile. A newer treatment option, brentuximab vedotin + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone (A+CHP) was the only treatment to show a significant added benefit over CHOP for patients, with side effects that were comparable to those of CHOP. Six studies assessed the economic impact of PTCL, the majority of which were focused on the USA, and found the mean monthly cost per patient to be 6328­US$9356. No studies were identified that assessed the impact of PTCL or its treatment on quality of life. Further research is needed to understand the impact of frontline PTCL treatment on patients and their families.

Comparison of best supportive care, CHOP, or R-CHOP for treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in Malawi: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness data for cancer treatment are needed from sub-Saharan Africa, where diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a common, curable cancer. In high-income countries, the standard of care for DLBCL is R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) chemoimmunotherapy. Rituximab is often not available in sub-Saharan Africa due to perceived unaffordability, and treatment with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) is common. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment in Malawi, comparing best supportive care, CHOP, or R-CHOP in patients with DLBCL. METHODS: For this cost-effectiveness analysis, we used published Malawi microcosting data, clinical data from a prospective cohort treated with CHOP, and clinical trial data evaluating R-CHOP. We used a decision-tree model to calculate costs per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted from the health system perspective for the treatment of patients with DLBCL with best supportive care, CHOP, or R-CHOP, running the model on a per-patient basis and a Malawi population-level basis. We used the WHO definitions of cost-effective (three times the GDP per capita of the country) and extremely cost-effective (equal to the GDP per capita of the country) as willingness-to-pay thresholds for Malawi. FINDINGS: On a per-patient level, compared with best supportive care, CHOP was estimated to avert a mean 7·4 DALYs at an incremental cost of US$1384, for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $189 per DALY averted, which is substantially lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold (extremely cost-effective). Compared with CHOP, R-CHOP was estimated to avert 2·8 DALYs at an incremental cost of $3324, resulting in an ICER of $1204 per DALY averted, which is slightly higher than the cost-effective willingness-to-pay threshold. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, CHOP remained cost-effective for DLBCL treatment in more than 99% of simulations, whereas R-CHOP was lower than the threshold in 46% of simulations. INTERPRETATION: We estimated CHOP to be cost-effective for DLBCL treatment in Malawi, and that the addition of rituximab might be cost-effective. Despite upfront costs, DLBCL treatment is probably a prudent investment relative to other accepted health interventions in sub-Saharan Africa. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

Adverse Events and Economic Burden Among Patients Receiving Systemic Treatment for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: A Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Limited published real-world data describe adverse events (AEs) among patients treated for mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL). The aim of this retrospective study was to describe treatment patterns, AEs, and associated healthcare costs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had two or more claims coded for MCL diagnosis, the first claim date (07/01/2012-05/31/2017) was the index date. Patients with pre-index MCL diagnosis or systemic treatment, or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation were excluded. Cohorts by regimen were followed for up to three lines of therapy. RESULTS: Patients (n=395; median age 72 years; 31% female) were observed over a total of 576 lines of therapy, the most common being bendamustine plus rituximab; rituximab monotherapy; R-CHOP; and ibrutinib. The most frequent AEs were hypertension (40.5%), anemia (37.7%), and infection (36.1%). However, hepatotoxicity ($19,645), stroke ($18,893), and renal failure ($9,037) were associated with the highest medical costs per patient per month. CONCLUSION: Among patients receiving common systemic treatments for MCL, AEs occurred frequently; some imposed substantial inpatient care costs.

Nationwide claims database analysis of treatment patterns, costs and survival of Japanese patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Limited data are available regarding treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), treatment costs and clinical outcomes for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in Japan. This retrospective database study analyzed the Medical Data Vision database for DLBCL patients who received treatment during the identification period from October 1 2008 to December 31 2017. Among 6,965 eligible DLBCL patients, 5,541 patients (79.6%) received first-line (1L) rituximab (R)-based therapy, and then were gradually switched to chemotherapy without R in subsequent lines of therapy. In each treatment regimen, 1L treatment cost was the highest among all lines of therapy. The major cost drivers i.e. total direct medical costs until death or censoring across all regimens and lines of therapy were from the 1L regimen and inpatient costs. During the follow-up period, DLBCL patients who received a 1L R-CHOP regimen achieved the highest survival rate and longest time-to-next-treatment, with a relatively low mean treatment cost due to lower inpatient healthcare resource utilization and fewer lines of therapy compared to other 1L regimens. Our retrospective analysis of clinical practices in Japanese DLBCL patients demonstrated that 1L treatment and inpatient costs were major cost contributors and that the use of 1L R-CHOP was associated with better clinical outcomes at a relatively low mean treatment cost.

Outcomes of treatment with CHOP and EPOCH in patients with HIV associated NHL in a low resource setting.

BACKGROUND: The optimal chemotherapy regimen for treating HIV associated NHL in low resource settings is unknown. We conducted a retrospective study to describe survival rates, treatment response rates and adverse events in patients with HIV associated NHL treated with CHOP and dose adjusted-EPOCH regimens at the Uganda Cancer Institute. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients diagnosed with HIV and lymphoma and treated at the Uganda Cancer Institute from 2016 to 2018 was done. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients treated with CHOP and 12 patients treated with DA-EPOCH were analysed. Patients completing 6 or more cycles of chemotherapy were 51 (47%) in the CHOP group and 8 (67%) in the DA-EPOCH group. One year overall survival (OS) rate in patients treated with CHOP was 54.5% (95% CI, 42.8-64.8) and 80.2% (95% CI, 40.3-94.8) in those treated with DA-EPOCH. Factors associated with favourable survival were BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2, (p = 0.03) and completion of 6 or more cycles of chemotherapy, (p < 0.001). The overall response rate was 40% in the CHOP group and 59% in the DA-EPOCH group. Severe adverse events occurred in 19 (18%) patients in the CHOP group and 3 (25%) in the DA-EPOCH group; these were neutropenia (CHOP = 13, 12%; DA-EPOCH = 2, 17%), anaemia (CHOP = 12, 12%; DA-EPOCH = 1, 8%), thrombocytopenia (CHOP = 7, 6%; DA-EPOCH = 0), sepsis (CHOP = 1), treatment related death (DA-EPOCH = 1) and hepatic encephalopathy (CHOP = 1). CONCLUSION: Treatment of HIV associated NHL with curative intent using CHOP and infusional DA-EPOCH is feasible in low resource settings and associated with > 50% 1 year survival.

The Effectiveness and Value of Deflazacort and Exon-Skipping Therapies for the Management of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.

DISCLOSURES: Funding for this summary was contributed by Arnold Ventures, Commonwealth Fund, California Health Care Foundation, National Institute for Health Care Management (NIHCM), New England States Consortium Systems Organization, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, and Partners HealthCare to the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), an independent organization that evaluates the evidence on the value of health care interventions. ICER's annual policy summit is supported by dues from Aetna, America's Health Insurance Plans, Anthem, Allergan, Alnylam, AstraZeneca, Biogen, Blue Shield of CA, Cambia Health Services, CVS, Editas, Express Scripts, Genentech/Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Harvard Pilgrim, Health Care Service Corporation, Health Partners, Johnson & Johnson (Janssen), Kaiser Permanente, LEO Pharma, Mallinckrodt, Merck, Novartis, National Pharmaceutical Council, Premera, Prime Therapeutics, Regeneron, Sanofi, Spark Therapeutics, and United Healthcare. Agboola, Fluetsch, Rind, and Pearson are employed by ICER. Lin reports support from ICER during work on this economic model and grants from Mount Zion Health Fund, National Institutes of Health (National Cancer Institute and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute), and the Tobacco-Related Diseases Research Program, unrelated to this work. Walton reports support from ICER for work on this economic model and unrelated consulting fees from Baxter.

Economic Outcomes in Patients with Chemotherapy-Naïve Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Enzalutamide or Abiraterone Acetate Plus Prednisone.

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer (PC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among US men and accounts for considerable healthcare expenditures. We evaluated economic outcomes in men with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC) treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (abiraterone). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis on 3174 men (18 years or older) utilizing the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database from 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2018. Men with mCRPC were included if they had at least one pharmacy claim for enzalutamide or abiraterone (first claim date = index date) following surgical or medical castration, had no chemotherapy treatment within 12 months prior to the index date, and had continuous VHA enrollment for at least 12 months pre- and post-index date. Men were followed until death, disenrollment, or end of study and were 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM). All-cause and PC-related resource use and costs per patient per month (PPPM) in the 12 months post index were compared between matched cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 1229 men with mCRPC prescribed enzalutamide and 1945 prescribed abiraterone with mean ages of 74 and 73 years, respectively. After PSM, each cohort had 1160 patients. The enzalutamide cohort had fewer all-cause (2.51 vs 2.86; p < 0.0001) and PC-related outpatient visits (0.86 vs 1.03; p < 0.0001), with corresponding lower all-cause ($2588 vs $3115; p < 0.0001) and PC-related ($1356 vs $1775; p < 0.0001) PPPM outpatient costs compared with the abiraterone cohort. All-cause total costs (medical and pharmacy) PPPM ($8085 vs $9092; p = 0.0002) and PC-related total costs PPPM ($6321 vs $7280; p < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the enzalutamide cohort compared with the abiraterone cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Enzalutamide-treated men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC had significantly lower resource utilization and healthcare costs compared with abiraterone-treated men.

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second leading cause of death among men with cancer in the USA. Healthcare costs associated with PC, including hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and medications prescribed to treat adverse effects, depend on the severity of the disease and intensity of treatment, but are generally very high. Enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate with prednisone (abiraterone) are both approved treatments for men with PC that does not respond to treatments that reduce the male hormone testosterone, known as castration-resistant PC (CRPC). These drugs are associated with varying treatment duration and different adverse effects, and therefore could result in differences in the use of healthcare resources and overall cost of treatment. Here we evaluated the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), which was calculated as the average number of healthcare encounters, including inpatient stays, outpatient visits, and pharmacy visits, and length of inpatient stays, and treatment costs associated with use of enzalutamide or abiraterone by men with metastatic CRPC (mCRPC), who had not received prior chemotherapy in the Veterans Health Administration. We found that men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC treated with enzalutamide used less healthcare resources and incurred lower total healthcare costs than men treated with abiraterone. On average, all-cause total healthcare costs were $1007 per patient per month lower and PC-related total healthcare costs were $959 per patient per month lower for patients treated with enzalutamide than those treated with abiraterone. These results support the hypothesis that the long-term HCRU and costs of enzalutamide may be lower compared with abiraterone.

Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin with chemotherapy in treatment of CD30-expressing PTCL.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) in the first-line setting for CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). STUDY DESIGN: An economic model was developed using clinical and quality-of-life (QOL) data from the ECHELON-2 trial, in which A+CHP demonstrated significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP). METHODS: A partitioned survival model, consisting of 3 health states (PFS, postprogression survival, and death), was constructed from a US payer perspective over a lifetime time horizon. PFS and OS observed from ECHELON-2 were extrapolated using standard parametric distributions. The best-fitting distributions (log-normal for both arms) were selected based on statistical goodness of fit and clinical plausibility of the long-term projections. Utilities were based on the European Quality of Life 5-Dimensional data collected in ECHELON-2. Medical resource use and costs were from literature and standard sources. RESULTS: The model predicted that A+CHP extended PFS and OS by 2.92 and 3.38 years, respectively, over CHOP. After incorporating QOL and discounting, A+CHP was associated with 1.79 quality-adjusted life-years gained at a total incremental cost of $159,388, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $89,217. Sensitivity analyses provided ICERs ranging approximately from $57,000 to $138,000. The estimated probability that A+CHP is cost-effective compared with CHOP was 82% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the ECHELON-2 trial data, this analysis found A+CHP to be cost-effective for patients with previously untreated CD30-expressing PTCL.

Cost-effectiveness of first-line treatment options for patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: a modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Several strategies are available for the initial treatment of advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma, but the optimal strategy in terms of cost-effectiveness is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the quality-adjusted effectiveness and costs of five modern treatment options for transplantation-eligible patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS: A Markov decision-analytic model was developed using a 20-year time horizon. Five of the most common treatment approaches were selected based on clinical experience and expert opinion: (1) six cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD), including data from the HD2000 trial, Viviani and colleagues, and EORTC trial; (2) six cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP; from the HD15 trial or PET-adapted as in the HD18 trial, two initial cycles of BEACOPP followed by four additional cycles for patients with a positive PET and either two or four additional cycles of BEACOPP for patients with a negative PET); (3) PET-adapted escalation (as in the RATHL trial, two cycles of standard ABVD chemotherapy followed by an additional four cycles of ABVD or AVD in PET-negative patients and four cycles of BEACOPP in PET-positive patients); (4) six cycles of brentuximab vedotin, doxorubicin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (A-AVD) or ABVD as in the Echelon-1 trial; and (5) PET-adapted de-escalation (as in the AHL2011 trial, two cycles of BEACOPP followed by PET2 scan; PET-positive patients received two additional BEACOPP cycles and PET-negative patients received two cycles of ABVD; at PET4, PET-negative patients completed two further cycles of either ABVD or BEACOPP depending on what they received after PET2, and PET-positive patients received salvage therapy). Note that all uses of BEACOPP in these strategies were BEACOPPescalated. The randomised groups of interest from these studies comprised 4255 patients enrolled between April, 2000, and January, 2016. Baseline probability estimates and utilities were derived from the included trials in addition to a systematic review of published studies. A Canadian public health payer's perspective was considered (CAN$1=US$0·74) and adjusted for inflation for 2018. All costs and benefits were discounted by 1·5% per year because life-years now are more valuable than future potential life-years. FINDINGS: Probabilistic analyses (10 000 simulations) showed that, for a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAN$50 000, a PET-adapted de-escalation strategy based on AHL2011 was more cost-effective 87% of the time. This strategy had the highest number of life-years (14·6 years [95% CI 13·7-15·1]) and quality-adjusted life years (13·2 years [95% CI 10·2-14·4]), and the lowest direct costs ($53 129 [95% CI 31 914-94 446]) compared with the other treatment regimens. Sensitivity analyses showed that the model was robust to key variables, including probability of treatment-related mortality, relapse, frequency of secondary malignancy, death from secondary malignancy, and probability of infertility after BEACOPP. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that, when considering cost, effectiveness, and short and long-term toxicities, the preferred treatment strategy for patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma is the PET-adapted de-escalation regimen starting with BEACOPP and de-escalating to ABVD as appropriate. Although our findings do not provide an absolute best treatment approach for clinicians to follow for all patients, they can contribute to shared decision making between patients and treating physicians. FUNDING: None.

Treatment patterns, adverse events, healthcare resource use and costs among commercially insured patients with mantle cell lymphoma in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: There are limited data on treatment patterns, adverse events (AEs), and economic burden in younger, commercially insured patients treated for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). METHODS: Adults with ≥1 treatment for MCL between 1 November 2013-31 December 2017 were identified from IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims-US; index date was first treatment. Patients carried ≥1 MCL diagnosis, were newly treated, and were enrolled continuously for ≥12 months prior to and ≥30 days following index. Patients receiving the four most common MCL regimens were included. Measures included frequency of incident AEs, resource use, and costs overall and by number of AEs. Adjusted logistic regression and generalized linear modeling evaluated risk of hospitalization and all-cause costs per patient per month (PPPM). RESULTS: Two thousand five hundred and nine treated patients had a drug-specific code and were classified to a specific treatment regimen. Of those patients, 1785 patients received at least one of the four most commonly used MCL regimens (R-CHOP, rituximab monotherapy, B-R, and ibrutinib) at some point over follow-up (median 23 months). R-CHOP was the most common regimen observed in the first line (26%), followed by rituximab monotherapy (19%), B-R (15%), and ibrutinib (5%). The median age was 57 years; median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 0. Among patients receiving the four most common regimens, 63% of patients experienced ≥1 incident AE (R-CHOP 77%, B-R 58%, and ibrutinib 52%). An increasing number of incident AEs was associated with increased hospitalization risk (odds ratio = 2.4; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 2.1-2.7) and increased mean costs PPPM (cost ratio = 1.1; 95% CI 1.1-1.2). DISCUSSION: This is the largest study describing treatment patterns and clinical and economic impact of MCL treatment. The most common regimens were R-CHOP, rituximab monotherapy, B-R, and ibrutinib. The majority of treated patients experienced at least one incident AE, with hospitalization risk and all-cause costs increasing as the number of AEs increased.

Extrapolating Survival Data Using Historical Trial-Based a Priori Distributions.

OBJECTIVES: To show how clinical trial data can be extrapolated using historical trial data-based a priori distributions. METHODS: Extrapolations based on 30-month pivotal multiple myeloma trial data were compared with 75-month data from the same trial. The 30-month data represent a typical decision-making scenario where early results from a clinical trial are extrapolated. Mature historical trial data with the same comparator as in the pivotal trial were incorporated in 2 stages. First, the parametric distribution selection was based on the historical trial data. Second, the shape parameter estimate of the historical trial was used to define an informative a priori distribution for the shape of the 30-month pivotal trial data. The method was compared with standard approaches, fitting parametric distributions to the 30-month data with noninformative prior. The predicted survival of each method was compared with the observed survival (ΔAUC) in the 75-month trial data. RESULTS: The Weibull had the best fit to the historical trial and the log-normal to the 30-month pivotal trial data. The ΔAUC of the Weibull with informative priors was considerably smaller compared with the standard Weibull. Also, the predicted median survival based on the Weibull with informative priors was more accurate (melphalan and prednisone [MP] 40 months, and bortezomib [V] combined with MP [VMP] 62 months) than based on the standard Weibull (MP 45 months and VMP 72 months) when compared with the observed median (MP 41.3 months and VMP 56.4 months). CONCLUSIONS: Extrapolation of clinical trial data is improved by using historical trial data-based informative a priori distributions.

Cost-effectiveness model of abiraterone plus prednisone, cabazitaxel plus prednisone and enzalutamide for visceral metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer therapy after docetaxel therapy resistance.

Aims: Among patients diagnosed with prostate cancer, 10-20% will develop castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) within 5 years; for 70%, CRPC will metastasize, mostly to the lungs and/or liver. We performed a cost-effectiveness model comparing abiraterone plus prednisone (ABI + PRD), cabazitaxel plus prednisone (CAB + PRD) and enzalutamide (ENZ) for visceral metastatic CRPC post-docetaxel therapy resistance. Methods: A three-state (Progression-Free, Progression, Death) lifetime Markov model was constructed to compare ABI + PRD, CAB + PRD, and ENZ from a United States healthcare payer perspective (2019 US$; discount rate 3%/yr.). Effectiveness was measured in life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Inputs included treatment costs, grade III/IV adverse events with incidence ≥5%, physician follow-up, lab and imaging tests. Phase III trial Kaplan-Meier curves were extrapolated to estimate overall survival and Progression-Free transition probabilities. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and utility ratios (ICURs), probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSAs) and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves at willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds were estimated. Results: Models estimated 3-year overall survival rates of 1.3% for patients treated with ABI + PRD, 16.2% for CAB + PRD, and 13.2% for ENZ. Estimated Progression-Free rates at 1.5 years were 0.51% for ABI + PRD, 0.27% for CAB + PRD, and 14.47% for ENZ. LYs and QALYs were 1.20 and 0.58 respectively for ABI + PRD, 1.48 and 0.56 for CAB + PRD, and 1.58 and 0.79 for ENZ. Total treatment costs were: $115,433 for ABI + PRD, $85,337 for CAB + PRD and $109,213 for ENZ. CAB + PRD and ENZ dominated ABI + PRD due to higher LYs gained. Incremental QALYs for ENZ vs. CAB + PRD were larger than incremental LYs. The ICUR for ENZ was $103,674/QALY compared to CAB + PRD. Conclusions: This analysis found ENZ provided greater LYs and QALYs than both ABI + PRD and CAB + PRD, at a lower cost than ABI + PRD, but at a higher cost compared to CAB + PRD. For patients with visceral mCRPC after docetaxel therapy resistance, ENZ was cost-effective 92% of the time with a WTP threshold of $100,000/QALY.

Real-world costing analysis for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in British Columbia.

Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (dlbcl) accounts for 30%-40% of all non-Hodgkin lymphomas. Approximately 60% of patients are cured with standard treatment. Targeted treatments are being investigated and might improve disease outcomes; however, their effect on cancer drug budgets will be significant. For the present study, we conducted an analysis of real-world costs for dlbcl patients treated in British Columbia, useful for health care system planning. Methods: Patient records from a retrospective cohort of patients diagnosed with dlbcl in British Columbia during 2004-2013 were anonymously linked across multiple administrative data sources: systemic therapy, radiotherapy, hospitalizations, oncologist services, outpatient medications, and fee-for-service physician services. Using generalized linear modelling regression, time-dependent costs (in 2015 Canadian dollars) were estimated in 6-month intervals over a 5-year period. The inverse probability weighting method was applied to account for censored observations. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to estimate standard errors for the mean cost at each time interval. Results: The cohort consisted of 678 patients (5-year overall survival: 67%). Mean age at diagnosis was 64 ± 14 years; median follow-up was 3.2 years. Mean total cost of care was highest in the first 6 months after diagnosis ($29,120; 95% confidence interval: $28,986 to $29,170) and after disease progression ($18,480; 95% confidence interval: $15,187 to $24,772). Systemic therapy and hospitalization costs were the largest cost drivers. At each time interval, costs were observed to be positively skewed. Conclusions: Our results depict real-world costs for the treatment of dlbcl patients with standard chop-r therapy. Cost-model parameters are also provided for economic modelling of dlbcl interventions.

Direct Costs Associated with Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Therapies.

BACKGROUND: About one third of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) relapse after receiving first-line (1L) treatment of rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Relapsed patients may then be eligible for second-line (2L) therapy. The study's objective was to examine health care use and costs among treated patients with DLBCL receiving 2L therapy versus those without relapse. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed Truven Health MarketScan® claims data between 2006 and 2015. Patients (≥18 years of age) had ≥1 DLBCL claim from 1 year before to 90 days after beginning 1L therapy, and comprised those without 2L treatment for ≥2 years (cured controls) versus those who initiated non-R-CHOP chemotherapy after discontinuing 1L therapy (2L cohort). 2L patients were further subgrouped: hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT [yes/no]) and time of relapse (months between 1L and 2L): early (≤3), mid (4-12), and late (>12) relapse. The primary outcome was 1- and 2-year health care costs. Hospitalization rate and length of stay were also measured. RESULTS: A total of 1,374 patients with DLBCL received R-CHOP and fulfilled all criteria: 1,157 cured controls and 217 2L patients (87 early-relapse, 66 mid-relapse, 64 late-relapse). Twenty-eight percent of 2L patients received HSCT. Charlson Comorbidity Index/mortality risk was higher for 2L patients (4.2 [SD: 3.0]) versus controls (3.8 [2.6]; p = .039), as were yearly costs (Year 1: $210,488 [$172,851] vs. $25,044 [$32,441]; p < .001 and Year 2: $267,770 [$266,536] vs. $42,272 [$49,281]; p < .001). HSCT and chemotherapy were each significant contributors of cost among 2L patients. CONCLUSION: DLBCL is resource intensive, particularly for 2L patients. Great need exists for newer, effective therapies for DLBCL that may save lives and reduce costs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study identified multiple important drivers of cost in the understudied population of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) receiving second-line (2L) treatment. Such drivers included hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) and chemotherapy. Even though HSCT is currently the only curative therapy for DLBCL, less than one third of patients receiving 2L and subsequent treatment underwent transplant, which indicates potential underuse. The variation in chemotherapy regimens suggested a lack of consensus for best practices. Further research focusing on newer and more effective treatment options for DLBCL has the potential to decrease mortality, in addition to reducing the extensive costs related to therapy options such as transplant.

Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of metastatic prostate cancer is associated with high personal and economic burden. Recently, new treatment options for castration-resistant prostate cancer became available with promising survival advantages. However, cost-effectiveness of those new treatment options is sometimes ambiguous or given only under certain circumstances. The aim of this study was to systematically review studies on the cost-effectiveness of treatments and costs of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) and metastasizing castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) on their methodological quality and the risk of bias. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in the databases PubMed, CINAHL Complete, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science Core Collection for costs-effectiveness analyses, model-based economic evaluations, cost-of-illness analyses and budget impact analyses. Reported costs were inflated to 2015 US$ purchasing power parities. Quality assessment and risk of bias assessment was performed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist and the Bias in Economic Evaluations checklist, respectively. RESULTS: In total, 38 articles were identified by the systematic literature search. The methodological quality of the included studies varied widely, and there was considerable risk of bias. The cost-effectiveness treatments for CRPC and mCRPC was assessed with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from dominance for mitoxantrone to $562,328 per quality-adjusted life year gained for sipuleucel-T compared with prednisone alone. Annual costs for the treatment of castration-resistant prostate cancer ranged from $3,067 to $77,725. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of treatments of CRPC strongly depended on the willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year gained/life-year saved throughout all included costs-effectiveness analyses and model-based economic evaluations. High-quality cost-effectiveness analyses based on randomized controlled trials are needed in order to make informed decisions on the management of castration-resistant prostate cancer and the resulting financial impact on the healthcare system.

Cost comparison by treatment arm and center-level variations in cost and inpatient days on the phase III high-risk B acute lymphoblastic leukemia trial AALL0232.

The Children's Oncology Group (COG) develops and implements multi-institutional clinical trials with the primary goal of assessing the efficacy and safety profile of treatment regimens for various pediatric cancers. However, the monetary costs of treatment regimens are not measured. AALL0232 was a COG randomized phase III trial for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia that found that dexamethasone (DEX) was a more effective glucocorticoid than prednisone (PRED) in patients younger than 10 years, but PRED was equally effective and less toxic in older patients. In addition, high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) led to better survival than escalating doses of methotrexate (C-MTX). Cost data from the Pediatric Health Information System database were merged with clinical data from the COG AALL0232 trial. Total and component costs were compared between treatment arms and across hospitals. Inpatient costs were higher in the HD-MTX and DEX arms when compared to the C-MTX and PRED arms at the end of therapy. There was no difference in cost between these arms at last follow-up. Considerable variation in total costs existed across centers to deliver the same therapy that was driven by differences in inpatient days and pharmacy costs. The more effective regimens were found to be more expensive during therapy but were ultimately cost-neutral in longer term follow-up. The variations in cost across centers suggest an opportunity to standardize resource utilization for patients receiving similar therapies, which could translate into reduced healthcare expenditures.

R-hyper-CVAD versus R-CHOP/cytarabine with high-dose therapy and autologous haematopoietic stem cell support in fit patients with mantle cell lymphoma: 20 years of single-center experience.

Standard of care for untreated mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is still debated. At the University Hospital Zurich, advanced MCL in physically fit patients is treated either with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone induction followed by consolidating high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell support (R-CHOP/HD-ASCT), or with rituximab plus fractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone alternating with high-dose methotrexate-cytarabine (R-hyper-CVAD/MTX-AraC) without consolidating HD-ASCT upon physicians' and patients' choice. We retrospectively analysed the outcome and therapy tolerance in patients with MCL treated with R-CHOP/HD-ASCT or R-hyper-CVAD/MTX-AraC at the University Hospital Zurich between January 1996 and January 2016. Forty-three patients were included; 29 patients received R-CHOP/HD-ASCT and 14 patients R-hyper-CVAD/MTX-AraC. Mean age at diagnosis was 54.4 years (range 38-68 years). Thirty-five patients (81.4%) completed the entire first-line therapy (n = 24 in the R-CHOP/HD-ASCT group, n = 11 in the R-hyper-CVAD group). Of those, all patients responded and 97% achieved a complete remission (CR). With a mean follow-up of 5.7 years 10-year progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 32% and overall survival (OS) was 76%, with no difference between the two therapy groups. Complication-induced hospitalisation rate, haematological toxicity and economic burden were significantly higher in the R-hyper-CVAD therapy group. In contrast, quality of life and global health state were better in the R-hyper-CVAD therapy group. Both first-line therapies showed similar outcome with a median OS longer than 10 years. Due to significantly lower haematological toxicity and lower economic burden, we recommend R-CHOP/HD-ASCT as first-line therapy in fit adult patients with advanced MCL.

Retrospective analysis of first-line treatment for follicular lymphoma based on outcomes and medical economics.

BACKGROUND: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), with indolent progression. Several treatment options are selected, based not only on disease status, quality of life (QOL), and age of patient, but also on recent increasing medical costs. We retrospectively analysed the first-line treatment of FL with regard to treatment outcomes and medical economics, and discuss the appropriate strategies for FL. METHODS: Data on a total of 69 newly-diagnosed patients with FL was retrospectively collected from 2001 to 2015. RESULTS: The median age of the patients was 60 years and the median follow-up was 58 months. A total of 25 cases with FL were treated with R monotherapy, and 28 cases were treated with R-CHOP as first-line treatment. The factors affecting the decision of physicians to use R or R-CHOP treatment were serum level of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and disease stage. The first-line treatment-associated survival did not show any statistical differences between R and R-CHOP. The average hospitalization and average of all medical costs during the first-line treatment were 4.1 days (R) versus 55.7 days (R-CHOP), and JPY 1,707,693 (USD 15,324) (R) versus JPY 2,136,117 (USD 19,170) (R-CHOP), respectively. CONCLUSION: R monotherapy for patients whose diseases show low tumor burden and who are not candidates for local treatment has benefits as a first-line treatment compared to R-CHOP, based on the patients' QOL and medical economics.

Factors and Costs Associated With Delay in Treatment Initiation and Prolonged Length of Stay With Inpatient EPOCH Chemotherapy in Patients With Hematologic Malignancies.

Reducing delays related to inpatient chemotherapy may reduce healthcare costs. Using a national database, we identified patients with lymphoma/leukemia with ≥1 etoposide, vincristine, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and prednisone (EPOCH) chemotherapy claim and evaluated chemotherapy initiation delay (ID), >1 day from admission. Standard tests/procedures prior to initiation were evaluated. Among 4453 inpatient cycles, 19.7% had ID, odds ratio 2.28 (95% confidence interval: 1.83-2.85) with cycle 1 compared to cycle 2, and mean costs were higher in patients with ID than without ID (p < .0001). Prior to cycle 1, patients were more likely to undergo routine diagnostic procedures compared to subsequent cycles. Efforts to perform routine procedures prior to admission may reduce hospital length of stay and costs.