ABSTRACT
CONTEXT: The need for patient navigator is growing, and there is a lack of cost evaluation, especially during survivorship. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an Ambulatory Medical Assistance (AMA) programme in patients with haematological malignancies (HM). DESIGN: A cost-effectiveness analysis of the AMA programme was performed compared to a simulated control arm. SETTING: An interventional, single-arm and prospective study was conducted in a French reference haematology-oncology centre between 2016 and 2020. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients were enrolled with histologically documented malignant haematology, during their active therapy phase, and treated either by intravenous chemotherapy or oral therapy. METHODS: An extrapolation of the effectiveness was derived from a similar nurse monitoring programme (CAPRI study). Cost effectiveness of the programme was evaluated through adverse events of Grade 3 or 4 avoided in different populations. RESULTS: Included patient (n = 797) from the AMA programme were followed during 125 days (IQR: 0-181), and adverse events (Grade 3/4) were observed in 10.1% of patients versus 13.4% in the simulated control arm. The overall cost of AE avoided was estimated to 81,113, leading to an ICER of 864. CONCLUSION: The AMA programme was shown to be cost-effective compared to a simulated control arm with no intervention.
Subject(s)
Hematologic Neoplasms , Adult , Humans , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Prospective Studies , Hematologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Medical AssistanceABSTRACT
Immunocompromised individuals such as patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) are at risk of impaired immune responses to vaccination. The objective of our study was to evaluate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-specific antibody responses in patients with CLL after the first, second, and third doses of the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines and after a single dose for patients with confirmed previous COVID-19. In all, 530 patients were included in the study. Patients received 2 doses at a 4-week interval and a third dose if they were seronegative after the second dose. Response rate was 27% after dose 1 and 52% after dose 2. Post-dose 2 treatment-naïve patients had the highest response rate (72%) followed by patients previously treated by chemoimmunotherapy (60%). Among patients receiving therapy, those receiving Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor alone (22%) or in combination with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies or venetoclax (0%) had the poorer response rate whereas patients who received venetoclax monotherapy achieved a significantly higher response rate (52%). A multivariable analysis identified age older than 65 years, ongoing CLL treatment, and gamma globulin ≤6 g/L as independent predictors of the absence of seroconversion. Post-dose 2 seronegative patients had a global response rate of 35% after dose 3. This study provides an argument for the use of a third dose and for prophylactic SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing monoclonal antibodies.