Modeling the cost-effectiveness of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in early-stage breast cancer

Optimal dynamic regimens with artificial intelligence: The case of temozolomide

We determine an optimal protocol for temozolomide using population variability and dynamic optimization techniques inspired by artificial intelligence. We use a Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) model based on Faivre and coauthors (Faivre, et al., 2013) for the pharmacokinetics of temozolomide, as well as the pharmacodynamics of its efficacy. For toxicity, which is measured by the nadir of the normalized absolute neutrophil count, we formalize the myelosuppression effect of temozolomide with the physiological model of Panetta and coauthors (Panetta, et al., 2003). We apply the model to a population with variability as given in Panetta and coauthors (Panetta, et al., 2003). Our optimization algorithm is a variant in the class of Monte-Carlo tree search algorithms. We do not impose periodicity constraint on our solution. We set the objective of tumor size minimization while not allowing more severe toxicity levels than the standard Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) regimen. The protocol we propose achieves higher efficacy in the sense that –compared to the usual MTD regimen– it divides the tumor size by approximately 7.66 after 336 days –the 95% confidence interval being [7.36–7.97]. The toxicity is similar to MTD. Overall, our protocol, obtained with a very flexible method, gives significant results for the present case of temozolomide and calls for further research mixing operational research or artificial intelligence and clinical research in oncology.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pegfilgrastim versus Six Days of Filgrastim for Preventing Febrile Neutropenia in Breast Cancer Patients

Aims and background

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a major complication of chemotherapy and is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality and costs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim versus six-day filgrastim in preventing FN in Italian patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy associated with a ≥20% FN risk.

Methods

The pharmacoeconomic evaluation was based on a decision-analytic model taking into account the possible consequences of FN (e.g., death and reduction/delay of chemotherapy dose). Parameters included in the model were relative risk of FN with pegfilgrastim versus six-day filgrastim; direct costs (drug purchase and FN-related hospitalizations); relative risk of relative dose intensity <85% with pegfilgrastim versus filgrastim; impact on long-term survival due to relative dose intensity <85%; and impact of age on FN and relative dose intensity <85%.

Results

Under base-case assumptions, pegfilgrastim was cost-effective compared to six-day filgrastim in Italy. The estimated cost, life expectancy and quality-adjusted life years per person for pegfilgrastim were € 3078, 16.47 years, and 15.32; the corresponding figures for six-day filgrastim were € 3033, 16.35 years, and 15.22. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with pegfilgrastim was € 409 per life-year gained and € 429 per quality-adjusted life year gained. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the results were most sensitive to the relative risk of FN for 6-day filgrastim versus pegfilgrastim. The results were moderately sensitive to the cost of pegfilgrastim and filgrastim, cost of drug administration, cost of FN hospitalization, and number of chemotherapy cycles. Pegfilgrastim remained cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio well below the accepted limit of € 50,000 per life year gained in all one-way sensitivity analyses. A two-way sensitivity analysis on cost of drugs showed a range of pegfilgrastim dominance over six-day filgrastim.

Conclusions

At the current official price in Italy, primary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim improved health outcomes with a very limited cost increase for the National Health Service payer. Even when very low prices of filgrastim and high prices of pegfilgrastim were considered in the model, the resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained well within the acceptable cost-effectiveness limit of € 50,000/quality-adjusted life year.

Evidence-Based Use of Colony-Stimulating Factors in Elderly Cancer Patients

BACKGROUND

Neutropenia and its complications represent the major dose-limiting toxicity of cancer chemotherapy, especially in the elderly. Hematopoietic growth factors have been shown to reduce the severity and duration of febrile neutropenia (FN) and to sustain chemotherapy dose intensity.

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken of studies of the relationship between age and the risk of neutropenia and its complications. Recent studies of the "Awareness of Neutropenia in Chemotherapy Study Group" related to the impact of age on neutropenic complications are also summarized.

RESULTS

The risk of FN associated with standard regimens increases with age and appears to be greatest during the first cycle of chemotherapy. FN continues to have a considerable clinical, economic, and quality-of-life impact on affected individuals. The risk of mortality associated with hospitalization with FN also increases with age but is largely associated with the higher rate of comorbidities observed in the elderly population. Despite increasing evidence that elderly patients experience similar benefit from cancer chemotherapy, reductions in dose intensity often compromise response rates and long-term survival. The hematopoietic growth factors reduce the risk of neutropenic events and the need for reduced dose intensity in elderly cancer patients. Primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) reduces the risk of FN and its complications in elderly patients receiving moderately intensive systemic chemotherapy for responsive malignancies. CSFs also appear to reduce cost and improve quality of life in selected elderly patients receiving chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary prophylaxis with CSFs should be considered in elderly patients with responsive and potentially curable malignancies who receive moderately intensive chemotherapy.

Epidemiology of febrile neutropenia

Febrile neutropenia (FN) continues to represent a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and cost in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. The reported rates of FN vary considerably among studies depending on the treatment regimen, delivered dose intensity, and patient population. The risk of initial FN appears to be highest during the first cycle of chemotherapy and is greatest in certain high-risk groups including elderly patients and those with various comorbidities. Febrile neutropenia continues to have considerable clinical, economic, and quality-of-life impact on affected patients. The risk of mortality associated with FN continues to be relatively high in patients with hematologic malignancies, patients presenting with comorbid illnesses, and patients with bacteremia, pneumonia, or other infection-related complications. The reduction in chemotherapy dose intensity that frequently follows an episode of FN may have considerable life-threatening impact on disease control in responsive and potentially curable malignancies. The economic burden of FN is substantial, with the greatest proportion of the cost associated with the relatively limited number of patients hospitalized for prolonged periods as a result of comorbidities or complications. The colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) may reduce the risk and cost associated with cancer treatment by reducing the probability of hospitalization with FN. Primary prophylaxis with the CSFs may be warranted in patients receiving intensive regimens or in those at greater risk because of age or comorbidities. Further study of various risk factors for FN should help identify patients at greatest risk and likely candidates for targeted use of the hematopoietic growth factors.

Cost-effectiveness of white blood cell growth factor use among a large nationwide cohort of elderly non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients treated with chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To determine the cost-effectiveness (as measured as cost per life-year saved) of white blood cell growth factor or colony-stimulating factor (CSF) use among a large cohort of elderly non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) patients in a real-world setting.

METHODS

We identified 13,203 NHL patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database who received the diagnosis from 1992 to 2002 and who received chemotherapy within 12 months of diagnosis. Benefit (effectiveness) of CSF use (primary and secondary prophylaxis) was measured as observed improvement in overall survival. Costs for each patient were calculated by adding the cumulative reimbursement amounts from Medicare claims. Cost-effectiveness was estimated by modeling the joint influence of CSF use on both costs and effectiveness using a propensity-score net monetary benefit approach.

RESULTS

Primary prophylactic CSF use was cost-effective at lower willingness-to-pay thresholds, whereas at higher thresholds, not providing prophylactic CSF became the cost-effective strategy. For secondary prophylactic CSF use among patients experiencing neutropenia, fever, and/or infection, the opposite trend was observed. For low willingness-to-pay thresholds (<$20,000 per life-year gained), not administering CSF was the cost-effective strategy, whereas CSF use became cost-effective as willingness to pay increased (from $100,000+ per life-year gained).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first large population-based study to empirically measure the cost-effectiveness of CSF among NHL patients treated with chemotherapy. CSF use as primary or secondary prophylaxis may be a cost-effective strategy depending on society's (or payers') willingness to pay for improvements in outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of primary versus secondary prophylaxis with pegfilgrastim in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of G-CSF pegfilgrastim primary (starting in cycle 1 and continuing in subsequent cycles of chemotherapy) versus secondary (only after an FN event) prophylaxis in women with early-stage breast cancer receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy with a >or=20% FN risk.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was constructed from a health insurer's perspective with a lifetime study horizon. The model considers direct medical costs and outcomes related to reduced FN and potential survival benefits because of reduced FN-related mortality. Inputs for the model were obtained from the medical literature. Sensitivity analyses were conducted across plausible ranges in parameter values.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pegfilgrastim as primary versus secondary prophylaxis was $48,000/FN episode avoided. Adding survival benefit from avoiding FN mortality yielded an ICER of $110,000/life-year gained (LYG) or $116,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The most influential factors included FN case-fatality, FN relative risk reduction from primary prophylaxis, and age at diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with secondary prophylaxis, the cost-effectiveness of pegfilgrastim as primary prophylaxis may be equivalent or superior to other commonly used supportive care interventions for women with breast cancer. Further assessment of the direct impact of G-CSF on short- and long-term survival is needed to substantiate these findings.

Evaluating the total costs of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: results from a pilot study with community oncology cancer patients

PURPOSE

While cancer chemotherapy-related febrile neutropenia affects patients' activities and medical expenditures, few studies have reported on the total costs of this condition. Here, we evaluate the feasibility of obtaining detailed and comprehensive cost information on patients who experience febrile neutropenia during cancer chemotherapy treatment.

METHODS

Community oncology cancer patients who experienced chemotherapy-associated febrile neutropenia recorded information about use of medical care, tests, devices, medications, and lost productivity. Direct cost estimates were derived from Medicare Physician Fee Schedules and cost-to-charge ratios. Indirect cost estimates were based on modified Labor Force, Employment, and Earnings data for employed patients and wages earned by paid caregivers. Multivariate regression models evaluated predictors of higher direct, indirect, and total costs.

RESULTS

Outpatients' mean direct and indirect costs were 5,704 dollars and 1,201 dollars (lymphoma), 1,094 dollars and 1,530 dollars (breast cancer), and 1,329 dollars and 1,325 dollars (lung cancer and myeloma), respectively. The mean direct and indirect costs were three- to tenfold and 1.5- to threefold greater for inpatients, respectively. Factors associated with higher direct costs of care included diagnosis of lymphoma and inpatient care; higher indirect costs, male versus female gender; higher total costs, lymphoma diagnosis and inpatient care.

CONCLUSION

Estimation of the total costs of cancer-related neutropenia is feasible. Indirect costs appear to account for as much as half of the total supportive care costs when febrile neutropenia is managed in the outpatient setting and about one fifth of the total supportive care costs in the inpatient setting.

Pegfilgrastim: current and future perspectives in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

Myeloid colony-stimulating factors (granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF] and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor) are commonly used in clinical practice for the prevention of anticancer chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and its potentially life-threatening complications. Pegfilgrastim is a novel recombinant human G-CSF pharmaceutically developed by covalent binding of a polyethylene glycol molecule to the N-terminal sequence of filgrastim. Due to its unique neutrophil-mediated clearance, pegfilgrastim can be administered once per chemotherapy cycle. Clinical trials have demonstrated that a single, fixed, subcutaneous dose of pegfilgrastim is comparable in safety and efficacy to daily injections of filgrastim for decreasing the incidence of infection following myelosuppressive chemotherapy in patients with cancer. Recent trials have been conducted to evaluate the use of pegfilgrastim in different clinical settings, including support of dose-dense regimens, mobilization and transplantation of hematopoietic stem cells.

Dalteparin versus warfarin for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolic events in cancer patients: a pharmacoeconomic analysis

OBJECTIVE

In a recent randomised trial (CLOT [Comparison of Low molecular weight heparin versus Oral anticoagulant Therapy for long term anticoagulation in cancer patients with venous thromboembolism]), which evaluated secondary prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients, dalteparin reduced the relative risk of recurrent VTEs by 52% compared with oral anticoagulation therapy (p = 0.002). A Canadian pharmacoeconomic analysis was conducted to measure the economic value of dalteparin for this indication.

DESIGN

The study was conducted from the Canadian healthcare system. The first part of this study utilised the CLOT trial database, from which resource utilisation data were converted into Canadian cost estimates (Can dollars, year 2005 values). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to compare the total cost of therapy between patients randomised to treatment with dalteparin or oral therapy. Health state utilities and treatment preferences were then measured in 24 oncology care providers using the time trade-off technique.

RESULTS

When all of the cost components were combined for the entire population (n = 676), patients in the dalteparin group had significantly higher overall costs than the control group (Can dollars 4162 vs Can dollars 2003; p < 0.001). The preference assessment revealed that 23 of 24 respondents (96%) selected dalteparin over warfarin, with an associated gain of 0.157 QALYs. When the incremental cost of dalteparin (Can dollars 2159 per patient) was combined with the QALY gain, the findings revealed that dalteparin was associated with a cost of approximately Can dollars 13,800 (95% CI 12,400, 15,100) per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the practical advantages of dalteparin in terms of convenience, improved efficacy and the acceptable economic value, this analysis suggests that long-term dalteparin therapy is a sound alternative to warfarin for the prevention of recurrent VTEs in patients with cancer.

Is Adjuvant Therapy for Older Patients with Node (+) Early Breast Cancercost-effective?*

BACKGROUND

Node (+) breast cancer represents over 40% of cases in older women and currently there is a debate whether adjuvant therapy for all older women is cost-effective.

PURPOSE

To evaluate if adjuvant treatment for early-stage (Stage I-IIIa) node (+) breast cancer with hormone therapy, chemotherapy, or combination therapy is cost-effective in older patients.

DESIGN

A decision-analysis model for 65, 75, and 85 year-old female breast cancer patients using life tables integrated the cost of treatment in dollars and impact in length and quality of life. Both estrogen receptor (ER) (-) and (+) patients were considered. The primary data sources were meta-analysis from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group and the Red Book Average Wholesale Price for drugs. The cost of treatment in dollars and impact of quality of life was examined. Scenarios were used when treatment benefit was uncertain. The incremental cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies were then compared and mapped graphically.

RESULTS

Adjuvant therapy is cost-effective in 65 year-old women with early breast cancer. In a 75 year-old ER (+) patient, hormone therapy is cost-effective, $10,965/quality-adjusted life years (QALY), but chemotherapy was more cost-effective, $27,406/QALY, if one assumed it was as efficacious as in a 65 year-old woman. In a 75 year-old ER (-) patient, chemotherapy was cost-effective at $42,605 with the same assumption. In an 85 year-old ER (+) patient, hormone therapy was cost-effective, $26,463/QALY, if efficacy is not age-sensitive, but chemotherapy was not as cost-effective for either ER (+) or ER (-) patients.

CONCLUSION

Treatment decisions for older breast cancer patients suffer from the lack of sufficient clinical trial data. Decision-analytic models can help policy makers who are faced with decisions about whether to support adjuvant therapy in older breast cancer patients and also outline the important parameters that need to be considered in such a decision.

Optimal use of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor in patients with cancer who are at risk for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To provide an overview of the risks for and occurrence of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with cancer and its optimal prophylactic management with recombinant human granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF).

DATA SOURCES

Original research, review articles, conference presentations, and published guidelines.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a common serious adverse event, and the risks for it can be predicted on the basis of patient characteristics and the chemotherapy regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal, cost-effective prophylactic management of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia with G-CSF requires the assessment of patient factors and the myelotoxicity of the chemotherapy regimen.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Neutropenia and its complications can be serious adverse events in patients who are treated with chemotherapy. Nurses should be familiar with how to identify patients who are at risk for neutropenia and its complications and should be prepared to discuss the need for first-cycle use of G-CSF with the other members of the treatment team as necessary.

The colony-stimulating factors: use to prevent and treat neutropenia and its complications

The colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) represent the only biological response modifiers used in clinical practice to treat or prevent neutropenia. These pleiotropic cytokines are available in clinical practice as granulocyte CSF (G-CSF), granulocyte-macrophage CSF (GM-CSF) and pegylated G-CSF. Neutropenia and its complications, most importantly febrile neutropenia (FN), remain major and serious side effects of cancer chemotherapy. Several studies and meta-analyses have addressed the clinical applications of CSFs to treat or prevent neutropenia. Guidelines have been developed to foster the appropriate use of CSFs. This article reviews the nature and use of the CSFs, and summarises the critical studies and guidelines. A historical perspective briefly describes the discovery, synthesis and clinical use of CSFs. The major biological and pharmacological characteristics are highlighted. The clinical applications of the CSFs are reviewed, including primary FN prophylaxis, secondary FN prophylaxis, treatment of FN, support of dose-dense chemotherapy regimens, use in leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndromes, utility in stem cell transplantation, and use in elderly and paediatric patients. Finally, clinical efficacy data, as well as the economic impact of the CSFs, are discussed.

Risk modeling: applying evidence-based risk assessment in oncology nursing practice

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

To introduce nurses to the concept of evidence-based risk models and their use in practice.

DATA SOURCES

Poster presentations at meetings and published articles and books.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Evidence-based risk models can be used in many clinical situations to identify patients at higher risk for a particular disease or clinical outcome, such as adverse events. These models may be based on molecular, epidemiologic, clinical, or family information obtained from patients. Risk models also may provide information about the cost-effectiveness of prevention, treatment, or support strategies for specific patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Determining the risks of disease- or therapy-related adverse events can help healthcare providers and patients. Risk assessment to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from supportive care can lead to the cost-effective use of these supportive care measures and improved clinical outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING

Through awareness of relevant evidence-based risk models, nurses can become more effective in actively managing their patients care. Because of their close and ongoing contact with patients with cancer, oncology nurses are in an ideal position to assess risk factors for adverse events and to use appropriate supportive care for those patients who are at greatest risk.

Is adjuvant therapy for older patients with node (−) early breast cancer cost-effective?

BACKGROUND

Node (-) breast cancer represents over 60% of cases in older women and currently there is a debate whether adjuvant therapy for these women is cost-effective.

PURPOSE

Evaluate if adjuvant treatment for early-stage node (-) breast cancer with hormone therapy, chemotherapy, or combination therapy is cost-effective in older patients.

DESIGN

Decision-analysis modeling using life tables integrated the cost of treatment in dollars and impact in length and quality of life. The primary data sources were meta-analysis from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group and the Red Book Average Wholesale Price for drugs. The incremental cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies were then compared and mapped graphically.

RESULTS

Adjuvant therapy is cost-effective in 65-year-old women with early breast cancer. In a 75-year-old estrogen receptor, ER (+) patient, hormone therapy, specifically tamoxifen, is cost-effective, 19,530 dollars/QALY. In a 75-year-old ER (-) the use of chemotherapy (AC or CMF) or 85-year-old ER (+) the use of hormone therapy was only marginally cost-effective, 54,000-76,000 dollars/QALY, only if efficacy was assumed to be age-insensitive (similar to a 65-year-old woman).

CONCLUSION

Decision-analytic models can help policy makers who are faced with decisions about whether to support adjuvant therapy in older breast cancer patients and also outline the important parameters that need to be considered in such a decision.

The economics of the colony-stimulating factors in the prevention and treatment of febrile neutropenia

Healthcare costs continue to rise with hospitalization representing the single largest component of direct medical costs associated with cancer care. Neutropenia and its complications including febrile neutropenia remain the major dose-limiting toxicity associated with systemic cancer chemotherapy. Febrile neutropenia often occurs early in the course of chemotherapy and is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality and cost. The colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) have been used effectively in a variety of clinical settings to prevent or treat febrile neutropenia and to assist patients receiving dose-intensive chemotherapy. A meta-analysis of the available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has confirmed the efficacy of prophylactic CSFs. Economic models based on measures of resource utilization derived from RCTs have provided estimates of expected treatment costs along with febrile neutropenia risk threshold estimates for the cost saving use of the CSFs. Recent studies have demonstrated the potential value of targeting the CSFs toward patients at greatest risk based on accurate and valid predictive models.

Impact of neutropenia on delivering planned adjuvant chemotherapy: UK audit of primary breast cancer patients

The UK audit was undertaken in primary breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy to: (1) record the incidence of neutropenic events (hospitalisation due to febrile neutropenia, dose delay of ⩾1 week or dose reduction of ⩾15% due to neutropenia); (2) evaluate the impact of neutropenic events on overall dose intensity (DI) received and (3) review the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in clinical practice. Data from 422 patients with Stage I–III breast cancer were collected from 15 centres. Cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and 5-fluorouracil(CMF)- or anthracycline-based regimens were the most commonly used. Only 5.2% of patients received G-CSF. Overall, 29% of patients experienced a neutropenic event, most frequently dose delay. Neutropenic events had a significant impact on the ability to deliver planned DI. Out of 422 patients, 17% did not achieve 85% of their planned DI; due to neutropenia in 11% of patients. Of the neutropenic patients receiving CMF- or anthracycline-based regimens, around 40 and 32% of patients, respectively, did not achieve 85% of their planned DI. Patients who experienced one neutropenic event had a higher risk of a second event. During adjuvant chemotherapy of primary breast cancer, neutropenic events are common, likely to occur in subsequent chemotherapy cycles, and have a significant impact on receiving planned DI.

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

Cytotoxic chemotherapy suppresses the hematopoietic system, impairing host protective mechanisms and limiting the doses of chemotherapy that can be tolerated. Neutropenia, the most serious hematologic toxicity, is associated with the risk of life-threatening infections as well as chemotherapy dose reductions and delays that may compromise treatment outcomes. The authors reviewed the recent literature to provide an update on research in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia and its complications and impact, and they discuss the implications of this work for improving the management of patients with cancer who are treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Despite its importance as the primary dose-limiting toxicity of chemotherapy, much concerning neutropenia and its consequences and impact remains unknown. Recent surveys indicate that neutropenia remains a prevalent problem associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and costs. Much research has sought to identify risk factors that may predispose patients to neutropenic complications, including febrile neutropenia, in an effort to predict better which patients are at risk and to use preventive strategies, such as prophylactic colony-stimulating factors, more cost-effectively. Neutropenic complications associated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, possibly compromised treatment outcomes, and excess healthcare costs. Research in quantifying the risk of neutropenic complications may make it possible in the near future to target patients at greater risk with appropriate preventive strategies, thereby maximizing the benefits and minimizing the costs.

Incidence and Predictors of Low Dose-Intensity in Adjuvant Breast Cancer Chemotherapy: A Nationwide Study of Community Practices

Purpose: This retrospective study was undertaken to assess practice patterns in adjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) and to define the incidence and predictive factors of reduced relative dose-intensity (RDI).

Patients and Methods: A nationwide survey of 1,243 community oncology practices was conducted, with data extracted from records of 20,799 ESBC patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy. Assessments included demographic and clinical characteristics, chemotherapy dose modifications, incidence of febrile neutropenia, and patterns of use of colony-stimulating factor (CSF). Dose-intensity was compared with published reference standard regimens.

Results: Dose reductions ≥15% occurred in 36.5% of patients, and there were treatment delays ≥7 days in 24.9% of patients, resulting in 55.5% of patients receiving RDI less than 85%. Nearly two thirds of patients received RDI less than 85% when adjusted for differences in regimen dose-intensity. Multivariate analysis identified several independent predictors for reduced RDI, including increased age; chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil, or cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and fluorouracil; a 28-day schedule; body-surface area greater than 2 m 2 ; and no primary CSF prophylaxis. CSF was often initiated late in the chemotherapy cycle.

Conclusion: Patients with ESBC are at substantial risk for reduced RDI when treated with adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients at greatest risk include older patients, overweight patients, and those receiving three-drug combinations or 28-day schedules. Predictive models based on such risk factors should enable the selective application of supportive measures in an effort to deliver full dose-intensity chemotherapy.

Targeted filgrastim support in patients with early-stage breast carcinoma: toward the implementation of a risk model

BACKGROUND

Severe neutropenia, a common consequence of chemotherapy, may result in infectious complications and hospitalizations. Preventive treatment with colony-stimulating factors is limited because of the inability to predict which patients will develop neutropenic complications. To the authors' knowledge, the current study is the first large prospective validation of a risk model in patients with early-stage breast carcinoma.

METHODS

Patients with Stage I-III breast carcinoma who were receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (n=624) were assigned to risk groups based on first-cycle absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadirs of <0.5 x 10(9)/L. Filgrastim (a recombinant human granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor) was administered from Cycle 2 onward to high-risk patients. Dose intensity and rates of neutropenic complications, including febrile neutropenia and hospitalization resulting from it, were calculated for each group and compared. High-risk patients were matched by chemotherapy regimen, stage of disease, age, and baseline ANC to historic-control patients and outcomes were compared within the matched pairs.

RESULTS

Both risk groups were found to have a similar proportion of patients receiving >85% of the dose intensity (95.8% vs. 94.4%). The rate of febrile neutropenia and hospitalization in the low-risk group (n=264) was 2.6% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.7-4.5%) and 0.8 (95% CI, -0.3-1.9%), respectively. The high-risk group was 2.6 times more likely to receive a full dose of chemotherapy, but no higher risk of neutropenic complications was reported compared with the matched controls.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk-related prophylactic administration of filgrastim facilitated the delivery of planned chemotherapy to the high-risk group of patients. However, further research is needed to confirm the results obtained in the current study in a randomized trial, if feasible, and in other chemotherapy and disease settings.

[Current framework of biotechnology products according to the available pharmacoeconomic studies]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Biotechnologic drugs have a high impact in health system because they contribute in new indications as well as in its high cost. The study's aim is to do a descriptive analysis from the pharmacoeconomic studies. The objective of the study was to establish the standards of efficiency and utility, as well as to know its therapeutic usefulness and rationale.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

The detection and selection of originals has been made through repeated searches in MEDLINE (PubMed) with every one of the different biotechnology products crossing the product name with life, year and saved. In function of the cost for year of life saved (YLS) were defined categories: saving of cost (< 0$/YLS), highly cost-effectiveness (0-20000$/YLS), cost-effectiveness (20001-40000$/YLS), doubtfully cost-effectiveness (40001-60000$/YLS), and no cost-effectiveness (> 60001$/YLS).

RESULTS

There are published figures only in 31% of the total of the searched biotechnological drugs. In 2 clinic conditions the drug reduces the cost, in 33 is highly cost-effectiveness, in 11 is cost-effectiveness, in 4 occasions is doubtfull cost-effectiveness and in 14 is no cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the high heterogeneity of methodology used in the pharmacoeconomic studies about biotechnological products, in the majority of the clinic situations evaluated we observed a good cost-effectiveness relation in the use of the biotechnological products.

Treatment of breast cancer with chemotherapy in combination with filgrastim: approaches to improving therapeutic outcome

Chemotherapy improves disease-free and overall survival in breast cancer, and its benefit is directly related to the percentage of the planned dose that is actually administered. In all current chemotherapeutic regimens, a substantial proportion of patients have reductions and/or delays in dosage due to side effects. In about half such cases, the delays or reductions are related to neutropenia. Overall, approximately 30% of patients have a reduction to less than 85% of the planned dosage. Women aged > or = 50 years are more likely to experience a reduction or delay in dose. Dose-intense regimens (excluding myeloablative high-dose chemotherapy) which increase the dose of chemotherapy or reduce the interval between cycles, or both, are a promising approach now under investigation. The human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor filgrastim reduces the incidence of neutropenia and facilitates adherence to full dose intensity in both standard and dose-intensified regimens. A model based on the first-cycle absolute neutrophil count nadir has been developed and validated to determine which patients should receive filgrastim. A cost benefit associated with the use of filgrastim in patients with breast cancer has been realised. This may lead to a re-evaluation of the current treatment guidelines.

Economic evaluations of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor: in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

The prevailing uncertainty about the pharmacoeconomic positioning of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in the prevention and treatment of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia has resulted in a number of pharmacoeconomic evaluations published in the past 10 years. These studies vary considerably regarding the approaches used and the results presented. In order to contribute to a clearer pharmacoeconomic positioning of G-CSF, a systematic review of economic evaluations was carried out. The focus of the review was prophylaxis and therapy of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with cancer. A computerised bibliography search of several databases was conducted yielding 33 studies. The findings demonstrated the cost-saving potential of G-CSF in standard-dose chemotherapy to be limited, with lower costs often seen in the control group. The results of these studies were too heterogeneous to extract a clear recommendation from a cost-saving point of view. The administration of G-CSF after high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell support resulted more often in cost savings in the G-CSF group as compared with standard-dose chemotherapy, illustrating a possible cost-saving potential of G-CSF. In the treatment of established chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia, cost savings were found in all studies. This result is surprising but hampered by the small number of studies (n = 5) and remains to be confirmed by more rigourously designed prospective economic analyses. Despite the substantial research on this topic, the economic evaluation of G-CSF is far from being settled and needs further investigation.

First-cycle absolute neutrophil count can be used to improve chemotherapy-dose delivery and reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving adjuvant therapy: a validation study

BACKGROUND

The nadir value of the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) in the first cycle of chemotherapy is an effective predictor of subsequent neutropenic events. This study was designed to validate an earlier published study based on a retrospective data analysis from a prospective randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

The original published model was applied to a trial of 143 patients to cross-validate the model. We also tested the specification of the model on our data by using a logistic regression model with several variables, including first-cycle nadir ANC, age, menopausal status, hormone-receptor status, previous radiotherapy, and first-cycle decrease in hemoglobin concentration. Patients received fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide every 21 or 28 days for six cycles without hematopoietic support from colony-stimulating factor.

RESULTS

In the cross-validation analysis, the original model successfully classified patients by risk of neutropenic events (C = 0.78). When the model specification was tested, first-cycle nadir ANC was the sole significant (P < 0.0001) predictor of neutropenic events and the model had a good predictive power (C = 0.78). The estimated relative risk of 4.8 did not differ from the risk cited in the original model (P = 0.91). A significantly higher percentage of our patients with a low first-cycle nadir ANC of 0.25 x 10(9)/liter or less experienced febrile neutropenia (30% versus 10%, P = 0.04) and received at least 85% of the planned dose intensity (55% versus 32%, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The original risk model used to predict neutropenic events was validated by our study. This information can be used to target high-risk patients for prophylactic treatment with filgrastim (recombinant methionyl human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor) in chemotherapy cycles 2 to 6.

Pharmacoeconomics in oncology

Healthcare costs in the USA continue to rise faster than the consumer price index. Nothing demonstrates this more vividly than the double-digit increases posted for the cost of the drug treatment of the oncology patient. A factor that will compound this cost is the expansion in the oncology patient population that will occur as the population ages. Pharmacoeconomics is a discipline that evaluates the relationship between clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes to determine the products and services that maximize the value for each dollar spent. Research in this area is evolving to meet the needs of the individual patient and decision-makers within a payer group, healthcare system, or society. Healthcare interests in countries in Europe, Canada and Australia have already adopted analytical tools and incorporated them into guidelines for drug use. The USA is also moving in this direction now that the Food and Drug Administration is considering requiring studies in pharmacoeconomics in addition to the standard studies of the safety and efficacy of drugs. The importance of this approach to oncology will be seen as policy-makers apply research findings to practice decisions.

Blinded, randomized, multicenter study to evaluate single administration pegfilgrastim once per cycle versus daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II or stage III/IV breast cancer

PURPOSE

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-control study was designed to determine whether a single subcutaneous injection of pegfilgrastim (SD/01, sustained-duration filgrastim; 100 microg/kg) is as safe and effective as daily filgrastim (5 microg/kg/d) for reducing neutropenia in patients who received four cycles of myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-two centers enrolled 310 patients who received chemotherapy with docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) and doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) on day 1 of each cycle for a maximum of four cycles. Patients were randomized to receive on day 2 either a single subcutaneous injection of pegfilgrastim 100 microg/kg per chemotherapy cycle (154 patients) or daily subcutaneous injections of filgrastim 5 microg/kg/d (156 patients). Absolute neutrophil count (ANC), duration of grade 4 neutropenia, and safety parameters were monitored.

RESULTS

One dose of pegfilgrastim per chemotherapy cycle was comparable to daily subcutaneous injections of filgrastim with regard to all efficacy end points, including the duration of severe neutropenia and the depth of ANC nadir in all cycles. Febrile neutropenia across all cycles occurred less often in patients who received pegfilgrastim. The difference in the mean duration of severe neutropenia between the pegfilgrastim and filgrastim treatment groups was less than 1 day. Pegfilgrastim was safe and well tolerated, and it was similar to filgrastim. Adverse event profiles in the pegfilgrastim and filgrastim groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

A single injection of pegfilgrastim 100 microg/kg per cycle was as safe and effective as daily injections of filgrastim 5 microg/kg/d in reducing neutropenia and its complications in patients who received four cycles of doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) and docetaxel 75 mg/m(2).

A predictive model for neutropenia associated with cancer chemotherapy

Studies of primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN) with recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rHu-G-CSF, filgrastim) administered to all patients starting their initial course of chemotherapy have demonstrated clinical effectiveness and an economic advantage in a wide range of settings. A recent meta-analysis confirmed the ability of filgrastim to reduce the risk of FN and documented infection in a variety of malignancies in both adults and children. The threshold risk for FN at which a cost saving is achieved by using filgrastim is inversely related to the daily cost of the drug and duration of hospitalization. Clinical practice guidelines for the use of filgrastim were developed based on these observations. Recent studies incorporating indirect institutional costs demonstrated that a cost saving can be achieved at substantially lower FN risk thresholds than previously estimated. Despite the demonstrated efficacy of filgrastim in primary prophylaxis, its value may be further increased by appropriately selecting patients and better understanding the importance of sustaining dose intensity in specific malignancies. Clinical prediction models capable of identifying individuals at high risk for neutropenic complications yield further reductions in FN risk thresholds and treatment costs in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. These models also may be used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness or cost-efficiency of filgrastim. A clinical prediction model recently was presented and validated incorporating both baseline clinical characteristics as well as the results of the first cycle of chemotherapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer. A cost-effectiveness ratio of $34,297/year of life saved was estimated based on dose-response assumptions derived from a previously reported adjuvant breast cancer trial studying the impact of dose reduction on disease-free survival. The cost-effectiveness of filgrastim was evident over a wide range of clinical and cost assumptions. Clinical prediction models permit the rational and cost-effective identification of patients for filgrastim support. Existing clinical practice guidelines should be reevaluated in light of new information available on both the total costs associated with FN as well as the cost-effectiveness of these agents in patients receiving chemotherapy for sensitive and potentially curable malignancies.

Chemotherapy dose reduction and delay in clinical practice. evaluating the risk to patient outcome in adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer

Randomised clinical trials demonstrate the importance of maintaining chemotherapy dose and dose intensity in the systemic adjuvant treatment of breast cancer, and show that the strategies of dose delay and dose reduction carry the risk of suboptimal outcome. Such dose modifications are usually necessitated by the myelosuppressive effects, specifically neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anaemia, resulting from the previous cycle of chemotherapy. The Canadian Database Initiative was designed to determine the incidence of neutropenic complications (an episode of febrile neutropenia or dose delay or reduction) and the frequency of complications by cycle of therapy using data from patients with breast cancer treated at centres across Canada. The centres used a variety of adjuvant chemotherapy regimens and the database covered the treatment of 444 patients, average age 47.7 years, who were treated between 1991 and 1996. Across all chemotherapy regimens, 42% of patients experienced at least one complication. Of those, 72% went on to have additional complications in subsequent cycles. The neutropenic complications usually occurred early in the treatment schedule.

A novel approach to maintain planned dose chemotherapy on time: a decision-making tool to improve patient care

Studies of primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia with recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (r-metHuG-CSF, filgrastim), administered to all patients starting with the initial course of chemotherapy, have demonstrated an economic advantage over a wide range of settings. In these analyses, the threshold risk for febrile neutropenia at which a cost saving is realised is inversely related to the direct medical costs of hospitalisation. Clinical practice guidelines for the use of filgrastim have been developed based on these observations. Recent studies incorporating indirect institutional costs have demonstrated that cost savings can be achieved at substantially lower febrile neutropenia risk thresholds than previously estimated. Despite the demonstrated efficacy of filgrastim in primary prophylaxis, its value may be further enhanced through the appropriate selection of patients for such therapy and a better understanding of the importance of sustaining dose intensity in specific malignancies. Clinical prediction models capable of identifying individuals at high risk for neutropenic complications yield further reductions in febrile neutropenia risk thresholds and treatment costs in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. Prediction models can also be used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness or cost-efficiency of filgrastim use. Such a model has recently been developed and validated and is described here which incorporates both baseline clinical characteristics as well as the results of the first cycle of chemotherapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer. A cost-effectiveness ratio of US$ 34297 (Euro 32002)dagger per year of life saved (YLS) was calculated based on dose-response assumptions derived from a previously reported adjuvant breast cancer trial studying the impact of dose reduction on disease-free survival. This figure is comparable with accepted cost-effectiveness ratios for other interventions, e.g. US$ 45000/LYS (Euro 41989) for renal dialysis for patients with end-stage renal disease. The cost-effectiveness of filgrastim was evident over a wide range of clinical and cost assumptions. Clinical prediction models permit rational and cost-effective selection of patients for filgrastim support. Current guidelines should be re-evaluated in light of new information available on both the total cost of febrile neutropenia, as well as the cost-effectiveness of these agents in specific clinical situations.

Federation of European Cancer Societies. Full report. Economic evaluation in cancer care: questions and answers on how to alleviate conflicts between rising needs and expectations and tightening budgets

All Western countries have experienced a fast growth in their healthcare expenses over recent decades. It is expected that pressure for such growth will continue in the future. But spending an ever larger share of our nation's resources on healthcare cannot be afforded. As a consequence, making choices will become more and more inevitable, even in cancer care. Economic evaluation is a very supportive tool for such decisions. This position statement concludes with recommendations for providers and healthcare policy-makers, to safeguard and further improve good clinical decision making and healthcare policy in cancer care under tightening budgets.

Pamidronate in prevention of bone complications in metastatic breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis

PURPOSE

Pamidronate is effective in reducing bony complications in patients with metastatic breast cancer who have known osteolytic lesions. However, pamidronate does not increase survival and is associated with additional financial costs and inconvenience. We conducted a post-hoc evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of pamidronate using the results of two randomized trials that evaluated pamidronate 90 mg administered intravenously every month versus placebo.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The trials differed only in the initial systemic therapy administered (hormonal or chemotherapy). Total skeletal related events (SREs), including surgery for pathologic fracture, radiation for fracture or pain control, conservatively treated pathologic fracture, spinal cord compression, or hypercalcemia, were taken directly from the trials. Using a societal perspective, direct health care costs were assigned to each SRE. Each group's monthly survival was equal and was projected to decline using observed median survivals. The cost of pamidronate reflected the average wholesale price of the drug plus infusion. The value or disutility of an adverse event per month was evaluated using a zero value (events avoided) or an assigned one (range, 0.2 to 0.8).

RESULTS

The cost of pamidronate therapy exceeded the cost savings from prevented adverse events. The difference between the treated and placebo groups was larger with hormonal systemic therapy than with chemotherapy (additional $7,685 compared with $3,968 per woman). The projected net cost per SRE avoided was $3,940 with chemotherapy and $9,390 with hormonal therapy. The cost-effectiveness ratios were $108,200 with chemotherapy and $305, 300 with hormonal therapy per quality-adjusted year.

CONCLUSION

Although pamidronate is effective in preventing a feared, common adverse outcome in metastatic breast cancer, its use is associated with high incremental costs per adverse event avoided. The analysis is most sensitive to the costs of pamidronate and pathologic fractures that were asymptomatic or treated conservatively.

Update of the economic analyses of the use of the colony-stimulating factors

The colony-stimulating factors have been used effectively in a variety of clinical settings to prevent febrile neutropenia and to assist patients receiving dose-intensive chemotherapy with or without stem cell support. Several studies have confirmed the clinical efficacy of the colony-stimulating factors used prophylactically in both solid tumors and the hematologic malignancies. The cost of these agents, along with their large scale clinical use, has prompted a number of economic investigations. Economic analyses based on measures of resource utilization derived from randomized clinical trials have provided febrile neutropenia risk threshold estimates for the cost saving use of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor. A number of important studies concerning the clinical and economic impact of these agents have been reported over the past year. These include a revised cost minimization study based on improved febrile neutropenia cost information and a cost-effectiveness analysis in the adjuvant breast cancer setting based on a clinical prediction model to select patients at high risk for neutropenic complications. Continuing clinical and economic evaluation along with updating of clinical practice guidelines is needed due to rapid technologic and clinical advances in this area.