Management and cost analysis of cancer patients treated with G-CSF: a cohort study based on the French national healthcare insurance database.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the management and costs associated with G-CSF therapy in cancer patients in France. METHODS: This study analyzed a representative random population sample from the French national healthcare insurance database, focusing on 1,612 patients with hematological or solid malignancies who were reimbursed in 2013 or 2014 for at least one G-CSF treatment dispensed in a retail pharmacy. Patient characteristics and treatment costs were analyzed according to the type of cancer. Then the costs and characteristics of patients associated with the use of different G-CSF products were analyzed in the sub-set of breast cancer patients. RESULTS: The most frequent malignancies in the database population were breast cancer (23.3%), hematological malignancies (22.2%), and lung cancer (12.4%). The reimbursed G-CSF was pegfilgrastim in 34.1% of cases, lenograstim in 26.7%, and filgrastim in 17.9%. More than one G-CSF product was reimbursed to 21.3% of patients. The total annual reimbursed health expenses per patient, according to the type of G-CSF, were €27,001, €24,511, and €20,802 for patients treated with filgrastim, lenograstim, and pegfilgrastim, respectively. Ambulatory care accounted for, respectively, 35%, 38%, and 41% of those costs. In patients with breast cancer, ambulatory care cost was €7,915 with filgrastim, €7,750 with lenograstim, and €6,989 with pegfilgrastim, and the respective cost of G-CSF was €1,733, €1,559, and €3,668. CONCLUSION: All available G-CSF products have been shown to be effective in cancer patients, and both daily G-CSFs and pegylated G-CSF are recommended in international guidelines. Nevertheless, this analysis of G-CSF reimbursement indicates that the choice of product can markedly affect the total cost of ambulatory care.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of PMMA, silicone, or acrylic intra-ocular lenses in cataract surgery in four European countries.

PURPOSE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of different intra-ocular lens (IOL) materials (Hydrophobic acrylic, Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), Hydrophilic acrylic and Silicone) implanted after cataract surgery with reference to Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy and Nd:YAG-related complications in four European countries (France, Italy, Germany and Spain). SETTING: A retrospective review of 1,525 patients (eyes), aged 50 to 80 years, operated with phacoemulsification for cataract in 1996 or 1997 in 16 surgical centres (4 per country). METHODS: The study was conducted using a cost-effectiveness approach. Medical charts were reviewed to collect retrospective information during the 3-year period following cataract surgery in order to identify patients who underwent Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy post-operatively. Clinical data were combined with unit costs assessed by experts for Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy and their complications. A cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per patient without Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy intervention) was estimated in relation to each IOL material used in each of the four European countries. RESULTS: Hydrophobic acrylic, specifically Acrysof, was the most cost-effective IOL material in all the countries except Germany where it was second. PMMA had the best ratio in Germany, was second in Spain and only third in Italy and France. Silicone was second in France and ranked third in the other countries, while hydrophilic acrylic had the worst ratio overall in all countries. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness ratios of hydrophobic acrylic (Acrysof) were better than those of other types of IOL materials used in most of the countries. Sensitivity analyses were performed to vary the base case analysis to demonstrate the economic importance of the assumptions. In all cases, hydrophobic acrylic IOL material was shown to be a highly cost-effective option.

Comparison of Nd : YAG capsulotomy rates following phacoemulsification with implantation of PMMA, silicone, or acrylic intra-ocular lenses in four European countries.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of Nd : YAG laser capsulotomy after cataract surgery according to the type of intra-ocular lens material (PMMA, silicone, hydrophilic acrylic, hydrophobic acrylic) implanted in four European countries (France, Italy, Germany, Spain). DESIGN: A retrospective record review. PARTICIPANTS: A review of 1525 patients (first operated eye), aged 50 to 80 years, operated on for cataract in 1996 or 1997 in 16 surgical centers (4 per country). METHODS: The study employed a retrospective cohort design. Charts were reviewed to collect information during at least a three-year period following cataract surgery to identify patients who underwent Nd : YAG laser capsulotomy postoperatively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on the type of intra-ocular lens implanted was extracted from the patient notes, as was the date and outcome of the Nd : YAG laser intervention. Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis with the time to Nd : YAG laser was performed on the data. RESULTS A total of 1525 patients (first operated eye) were available for the study (n = 294 for hydrophilic acrylic, n = 384 for PMMA, n = 421 for hydrophobic acrylic, n = 426 for silicone). There was a highly statistically significant difference between the IOL groups for the incidence of posterior capsule opacification (p < 0.001) and for Nd : YAG laser treatment (p < 0.001). The mean delay of Nd : YAG laser treatment from the date of cataract operation was 2.48 years (+/-1.70, ranging from 0 to 5.88 years). The rate of Nd : YAG laser capsulotomy over the follow-up period was lowest in the hydrophobic acrylic group (7.1%), followed by silicone (16.2%), PMMA (19.3%) and hydrophilic acrylic (31.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A low incidence of posterior capsular opacification (PCO) and Nd : YAG laser treatment was detected in hydrophobic acrylic IOLs in comparison to three other types of IOLs implanted in a large cohort of persons with age-related cataract. Choice of IOL type may reduce the need for Nd : YAG laser treatment, although further research on the reasons for this is needed.

Neodymium:YAG laser rates after bilateral implantation of hydrophobic or hydrophilic multifocal intraocular lenses: twenty-four month retrospective comparative study.

PURPOSE: To compare 2-year neodymium:YAG (Nd:YAG) laser capsulotomy rates after bilateral implantation of hydrophobic or hydrophilic multifocal intraocular lenses (IOLs). SETTING: Private practice, southwest France. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with cataract or clear lenses who had bilateral implantation of AcrySof ReSTOR hydrophobic or Acri.LISA hydrophilic acrylic multifocal IOLs between May 2004 and June 2009 by the same surgeon at 1 clinic. Data were extracted from patients' files maintained by the surgeon and ophthalmologists involved in postoperative care. Time from IOL implantation to Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy was analyzed with Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Imbalances in confounding variables were adjusted with a Cox model. RESULTS: The hydrophobic IOL group comprised 80 patients and the hydrophilic IOL group, 76 patients. There were significantly more men in the hydrophobic group (51.3%) than in the hydrophilic group (30.7%) and patients were significantly younger in the hydrophobic group (63.0 years versus 65.8 years) (both P<.01). Eighteen months postoperatively, 4.4% of eyes in the hydrophobic group and 14.6% of eyes in the hydrophilic group required Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy. After 24 months, the respective rates were 8.8% and 37.2% (P<.0001). Eyes in the hydrophilic group had a 4.50-fold (2.28 versus 8.91) higher risk for Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy (P<.0001) that persisted after adjusting for age (relative risk 4.64, 2.32 to 9.29) (P<.0001). Patients younger than 63.5 years in the hydrophilic group were more likely to require Nd:YAG laser capsulotomy. CONCLUSION: Capsulotomy was significantly less frequent after hydrophobic IOL implantation than after hydrophilic IOL implantation 24 months postoperatively. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: No author has a financial or proprietary interest in any material or method mentioned. An additional disclosure is found in the footnotes.

Incidence of Nd:YAG laser capsulotomies after cataract surgery: comparison of 3 square-edged lenses of different composition.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of Nd:YAG laser treatment following 3 square-edged intraocular lenses (IOLs) of different composition implanted during cataract surgery. DESIGN: Patient chart analysis. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 50-85 years and given a hydrophobic acrylic IOL (either SA60AT or AR40E) or hydrophilic acrylic IOL (XL-Stabi) were included. Analysis was conducted of 767 eyes treated with SA60AT (n = 250), AR40E (n = 254), or XL-Stabi (n = 263). METHODS: This retrospective study involved patients who had undergone cataract surgery between 2001 and 2002. Ophthalmology centres were accepted into the study if they used at least 2 of the IOLs being investigated. The medical files of patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were listed, and eligible cases were selected randomly. Patients' characteristics were obtained from their medical files. Data on postsurgical complications and Nd:YAG laser treatment over 3 years were also extracted. Follow-up data were obtained from the medical files and the patients' ophthalmologists. Time to Nd:YAG laser treatment was analysed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves adjusted with a Cox model. RESULTS: After 3 years' follow-up the proportions of patients who had not received Nd:YAG laser treatment were 87.0% with SA60AT, 76.6% with AR40E, and 54.6% with XL-Stabi (p < 0.001). Cox's model adjusted for centre effects and the presence of diabetes estimated risk ratios of 2.8 for AR40E (p < 0.0005) and 5.1 for XL-Stabi (p < 0.0001), compared with the reference lens SA60AT. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 3 square-edged lenses studied, the SA60AT was associated with a lower incidence of Nd:YAG laser treatment than either AR40E or XL-Stabi.