Alternative Trastuzumab Dosing Schedules Are Associated With Reductions in Health Care Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Cost-Effective and Sustainable Drug Use in Hospitals: A Systematic and Practice-Based Approach

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Rising healthcare costs challenge the financial sustainability of healthcare systems. Interventional pharmacoeconomics has emerged as a vital discipline to improve the cost-effective and sustainable use of drugs in clinical practice. However, current efforts are often fragmented, highlighting the need for an integrated hospital-wide approach. This study aimed to develop a scalable framework to systematically identify and implement cost-effective and sustainable drug use practices in hospitals.

METHODS

This study was conducted at the Erasmus University Medical Centre in Rotterdam between December 2022 and July 2023. A novel '8-Step Efficiency Model' was designed to systematically identify and evaluate strategies for cost-effective and sustainable drug use. The process involved identifying high-expenditure drugs, systematically assessing these drugs using the Efficiency Model, and conducting a multi-disciplinary evaluation of the proposed cost-effectiveness strategies.

RESULTS

The study assessed 39 high-cost drugs, representing 57% of the Dutch national expensive drug expenditure in 2021. Initiatives for enhancing cost-effectiveness and sustainability were identified or developed for 27 out of the 39 assessed drugs (51% of the national drug expenditure in 2021). Case examples of infliximab (e.g., wastage prevention) and intravenous immunoglobulins (e.g., lean body weight dosing) illustrate practical applications of the framework, resulting in substantial cost savings and improved sustainability.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a systematic scalable model for enhancing the cost-effectiveness of high-expenditure drugs in hospital settings. This approach not only addresses financial sustainability but also promotes the quality of patient care and sustainable drug use. This model could serve as a generic blueprint for other institutions to identify and implement cost-effective and sustainable drug use strategies.

Travel-associated carbon emissions of patients receiving cancer treatment from an urban safety net hospital

Background

Healthcare transportation, particularly the transportation of patients to access healthcare services, is a significant source of carbon emissions. This study aims to estimate the carbon emissions of patient transportation among patients receiving cancer care at an urban community safety net hospital.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of patients seen at the oncology clinic of an urban community safety net hospital between 1 July 2022 and 30 June 2023. Patients with at least one in-person visit in 1 year, documented home addresses, and oncologic diagnoses were included in the study. The distance between each patient's home address and the hospital was calculated using the Google Map API key and a macro to calculate distance in metres. The total estimated carbon emissions were calculated using the EPA equivalencies calculator. The primary outcome was carbon emissions from patients' round-trip travel from home to hospital.

Results

From 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023, 13,970 visits were made to the oncology clinic. Of these, 8,235 visits made by 1,080 patients met the criteria for inclusion in the final analysis. Of the 8,235 visits recorded, 5,095 (61.8%) were follow-up/laboratory visits. The 1,080 patients who attended the clinic had a mean age of 63.8 years; 700 (64.8%) were male, and 525 (48.6%) were Black or African-American. Breast cancer was the most common diagnosis, accounting for 423 (39.2%) of cancer diagnoses. Each patient travelled 4.8 (0.3-149.3) miles for a one-way trip and 9.6 (0.7-298.6) miles for a round trip to receive cancer care. Approximately 1,520 (280-119,440) g carbon were emitted per patient visit. A total of 79,582 round-trip miles was calculated for the 8,235 visits made by all patients within 1 year, which corresponds to 31,832 kg CO2 emissions equivalent to 35,658 pounds of coal burned, 1,462 propane cylinders used for a home, or 3,872,250 smartphones charged.

Conclusion

Travel to receive cancer care is associated with significant carbon emissions and poses a climate and public health risk. Efforts to decrease the overall carbon footprint of cancer treatment are needed to minimise the contributions of cancer treatment to climate change.

Effect of alternative dosing strategies of pembrolizumab and nivolumab on health-care emissions in the Netherlands: a carbon footprint analysis

BACKGROUND

Hospitals contribute substantially to greenhouse gas emissions and face a moral obligation to prioritise emission reduction. Drugs constitute an important component of the greenhouse gas emissions of hospitals. Alternative dosing strategies (ADS) have been implemented to improve the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab and nivolumab. However, the impact of these ADS on greenhouse gas emissions remains unknown. Therefore, we aimed to analyse the effect of ADS implementation on the carbon emissions of treatment with pembrolizumab and nivolumab.

METHODS

We used a process-based lifecycle assessment to quantify the environmental impact of pembrolizumab and nivolumab, focused on equivalent carbon dioxide emissions (CO2e). Lifecycle inventory and impact data from Erasmus University Medical Center (Rotterdam, Netherlands) were used to calculate the CO2e for pembrolizumab and nivolumab, their dosing intervals, and the impact of ADS on CO2e. The functional unit of the study was the administration of a single dose of pembrolizumab or nivolumab.

FINDINGS

In 2022, the annual carbon emissions related to pembrolizumab and nivolumab treatment in the Erasmus University Medical Center were 445 tons of CO2e, averaging 94 kg of CO2e per dose. Pharmaceutical production was the main driver of treatment-related carbon emissions (mean 92·9% of total emissions). Applying ADS resulted in 21-26% and 9-11% CO2e reductions for pembrolizumab and nivolumab, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

This study shows the environmental impact of pembrolizumab and nivolumab treatment and calls for further implementation of ADS for pembrolizumab, nivolumab, and other anti-PD-(L)1 monoclonal antibodies, and more sustainable pharmaceutical production processes. Our findings create environmental awareness and contribute to the promotion and understanding of health-care practices with lower carbon emissions.

FUNDING

None.

Strategies and tactics to reduce the impact of healthcare on climate change: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review the international literature and assess the ways healthcare systems are mitigating and can mitigate their carbon footprint, which is currently estimated to be more than 4.4% of global emissions.

DESIGN

Systematic review of empirical studies and grey literature to examine how healthcare services and institutions are limiting their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

DATA SOURCES

Eight databases and authoritative reports were searched from inception dates to November 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Teams of investigators screened relevant publications against the inclusion criteria (eg, in English; discussed impact of healthcare systems on climate change), applying four quality appraisal tools, and results are reported in accordance with PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses).

RESULTS

Of 33 737 publications identified, 32 998 (97.8%) were excluded after title and abstract screening; 536 (72.5%) of the remaining publications were excluded after full text review. Two additional papers were identified, screened, and included through backward citation tracking. The 205 included studies applied empirical (n=88, 42.9%), review (n=60, 29.3%), narrative descriptive (n=53, 25.9%), and multiple (n=4, 2.0%) methods. More than half of the publications (51.5%) addressed the macro level of the healthcare system. Nine themes were identified using inductive analysis: changing clinical and surgical practices (n=107); enacting policies and governance (n=97); managing physical waste (n=83); changing organisational behaviour (n=76); actions of individuals and groups (eg, advocacy, community involvement; n=74); minimising travel and transportation (n=70); using tools for measuring GHG emissions (n=70); reducing emissions related to infrastructure (n=63); and decarbonising the supply chain (n=48).

CONCLUSIONS

Publications presented various strategies and tactics to reduce GHG emissions. These included changing clinical and surgical practices; using policies such as benchmarking and reporting at a facility level, and financial levers to reduce emissions from procurement; reducing physical waste; changing organisational culture through workforce training; supporting education on the benefits of decarbonisation; and involving patients in care planning. Numerous tools and frameworks were presented for measuring GHG emissions, but implementation and evaluation of the sustainability of initiatives were largely missing. At the macro level, decarbonisation approaches focused on energy grid emissions, infrastructure efficiency, and reducing supply chain emissions, including those from agriculture and supply of food products. Decarbonisation mechanisms at the micro and meso system levels ranged from reducing low value care, to choosing lower GHG options (eg, anaesthetic gases, rescue inhalers), to reducing travel. Based on these strategies and tactics, this study provides a framework to support the decarbonisation of healthcare systems.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42022383719.

The tyranny of non-inferiority trials

Opportunities to decrease the toxicity and cost of approved treatment regimens with lower dose, less frequent, or shorter duration alternative regimens have been limited by the perception that alternatives must be non-inferior to approved regimens. Non-inferiority trials are large and expensive to do, because they must show statistically that the alternative and approved therapies differ in a single outcome, by a margin far smaller than that required to demonstrate superiority. Non-inferiority's flaws are manifest: it ignores variability expected to occur with repeated evaluation of the approved therapy, fails to recognise that a trial of similar design will be labelled as superiority or non-inferiority depending on whether it is done prior to or after initial registration of the approved treatment, and relegates endpoints such as toxicity and cost. For example, while a less toxic and less costly regimen of 3 months duration would typically be required to demonstrate efficacy that is non-inferior to that of a standard regimen of 6 months to displace it, the longer duration therapy has no such obligation to prove its superiority. This situation is the tyranny of the non-inferiority trial: its statistics perpetuate less cost-effective regimens, which are not patient-centred, even when less intensive therapies confer survival benefits nearly identical to those of the standard, by placing a disproportionately large burden of proof on the alternative. This approach is illogical. We propose that the designation of trials as superiority or non-inferiority be abandoned, and that randomised, controlled trials should henceforth be described simply as "comparative".

Assessing the Environmental and Downstream Human Health Impacts of Decentralizing Cancer Care

Importance

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from health care are substantial and disproportionately harm persons with cancer. Emissions from a central component of oncology care, outpatient clinician visits, are not well described, nor are the reductions in emissions and human harms that could be obtained through decentralizing this aspect of cancer care (ie, telemedicine and local clinician care when possible).

Objective

To assess potential reductions in GHG emissions and downstream health harms associated with telemedicine and fully decentralized cancer care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based cohort study and counterfactual analyses using life cycle assessment methods analyzed persons receiving cancer care at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between May 2015 and December 2020 as well as persons diagnosed with cancer over the same period from the Cancer in North America (CiNA) public dataset. Data were analyzed from October 2023 to April 2024.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The adjusted per-visit day difference in GHG emissions in kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents between 2 periods: an in-person care model period (May 2015 to February 2020; preperiod) and a telemedicine period (March to December 2020; postperiod), and the annual decrease in disability-adjusted life-years in a counterfactual model where care during the preperiod was maximally decentralized nationwide.

Results

Of 123 890 included patients, 73 988 (59.7%) were female, and the median (IQR) age at first diagnosis was 59 (48-68) years. Patients were seen over 1.6 million visit days. In mixed-effects log-linear regression, the mean absolute reduction in per-visit day CO2 equivalent emissions between the preperiod and postperiod was 36.4 kg (95% CI, 36.2-36.6), a reduction of 81.3% (95% CI, 80.8-81.7) compared with the baseline model. In a counterfactual decentralized care model of the preperiod, there was a relative emissions reduction of 33.1% (95% CI, 32.9-33.3). When demographically matched to 10.3 million persons in the CiNA dataset, decentralized care would have reduced national emissions by 75.3 million kg of CO2 equivalents annually; this corresponded to an estimated annual reduction of 15.0 to 47.7 disability-adjusted life-years.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study found that using decentralization through telemedicine and local care may substantially reduce cancer care's GHG emissions; this corresponds to small reductions in human mortality.

Projected environmental and public health benefits of extended-interval dosing: an analysis of pembrolizumab use in a US national health system

BACKGROUND

Health care is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions, leading to climate change and public health harms. Changes are needed to improve the environmental sustainability of health-care practices, but such changes should not sacrifice patient outcomes or financial sustainability. Alternative dosing strategies that reduce the frequency with which specialty drugs are administered, without sacrificing patient outcomes, are an attractive possibility for improving environmental sustainability. We sought to inform environmentally sustainable cancer care by estimating and comparing the environmental and financial effects of alternative, clinically equivalent strategies for pembrolizumab administration.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis using a cohort of patients from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in the USA who received one or more pembrolizumab doses between May 1, 2020, and Sept 30, 2022. Using baseline, real-world administration of pembrolizumab, we generated simulated pembrolizumab use data under three near-equivalent counterfactual pembrolizumab administration strategies defined by combinations of weight-based dosing, pharmacy-level vial sharing and dose rounding, and extended-interval dosing (ie, every 6 weeks). For each counterfactual dosing strategy, we estimated greenhouse gas emissions related to pembrolizumab use across the VHA cohort using a deterministic environmental impact model that estimated greenhouse gas emissions due to patient travel, drug manufacture, and medical waste as the primary outcome measure.

FINDINGS

We identified 7813 veterans who received at least one dose of pembrolizumab-containing therapy in the VHA during the study period. 59 140 pembrolizumab administrations occurred in the study period, of which 46 255 (78·2%) were dosed at 200 mg every 3 weeks, 12 885 (21·8%) at 400 mg every 6 weeks, and 14 955 (25·3%) were coadministered with infusional chemotherapies. Adoption of weight-based, extended-interval pembrolizumab dosing (4 mg/kg every 6 weeks) and pharmacy-level stewardship strategies (ie, dose rounding and vial sharing) for all pembrolizumab infusions would have resulted in 24·7% fewer administration events than baseline dosing (44 533 events vs 59 140 events) and an estimated 200 metric tons less CO2 emitted per year as a result of pembrolizumab use within the VHA (650 tons vs 850 tons of CO2, a relative reduction of 24%), largely due to reductions in distance travelled by patients to receive treatment. Similar results were observed when weight-based and extended-interval dosing were applied only to pembrolizumab monotherapy and pembrolizumab in combination with oral therapies.

INTERPRETATION

Alternative pembrolizumab administration strategies might have environmental advantages over the current dosing and compounding paradigms. Specialty medication dosing can be optimised for health-care spending and environmental sustainability without sacrificing clinical outcomes.

FUNDING

None.