Real-world use of inotuzumab ozogamicin is associated with lower health care costs than blinatumomab in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the first relapsed/refractory setting.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Alexander Russell-Smith, Louise Murphy, Amy Nguyen, Cori Blauer-Peterson, Marilou Terpenning, Feng Cao, Shiqiang Li, Tim Bancroft, Noah Webb, Stephanie Dorman, Richa Shah
{"title":"Real-world use of inotuzumab ozogamicin is associated with lower health care costs than blinatumomab in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the first relapsed/refractory setting.","authors":"Alexander Russell-Smith, Louise Murphy, Amy Nguyen, Cori Blauer-Peterson, Marilou Terpenning, Feng Cao, Shiqiang Li, Tim Bancroft, Noah Webb, Stephanie Dorman, Richa Shah","doi":"10.57264/cer-2023-0142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aim:</b> To compare all-cause and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients receiving inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) and blinatumomab (Blina) for ALL in the first relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. <b>Patients & methods:</b> We studied retrospective claims for adult commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees with ALL receiving InO (n = 29) or Blina (n = 23) from 1 January 2015 to 16 February 2021. Mean per-patient-per-month (PPPM) HCRU and total costs were described and multivariable-adjusted PPPM total all-cause and ALL-related predicted costs were calculated. <b>Results:</b> Mean monthly ALL-related hospitalizations were the same for patients receiving InO and Blina (PPPM = 0.8 stays); however, the length of ALL-related hospital stay was almost twice as long among patients receiving Blina versus InO (ALL-related: InO = 7.6 days; Blina = 14.1 days; p = 0.346). In multivariable models, total ALL-related costs were 43% lower for InO compared with Blina (PPPM costs: InO = $93,767; Blina = $163,470; p = 0.021). <b>Conclusion:</b> In the first R/R setting, patients who used InO had significantly lower all-cause and ALL-related costs compared with patients who used Blina, in part driven by hospitalization patterns.</p>","PeriodicalId":15539,"journal":{"name":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","volume":" ","pages":"e230142"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10842295/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of comparative effectiveness research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2023-0142","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To compare all-cause and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients receiving inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) and blinatumomab (Blina) for ALL in the first relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. Patients & methods: We studied retrospective claims for adult commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees with ALL receiving InO (n = 29) or Blina (n = 23) from 1 January 2015 to 16 February 2021. Mean per-patient-per-month (PPPM) HCRU and total costs were described and multivariable-adjusted PPPM total all-cause and ALL-related predicted costs were calculated. Results: Mean monthly ALL-related hospitalizations were the same for patients receiving InO and Blina (PPPM = 0.8 stays); however, the length of ALL-related hospital stay was almost twice as long among patients receiving Blina versus InO (ALL-related: InO = 7.6 days; Blina = 14.1 days; p = 0.346). In multivariable models, total ALL-related costs were 43% lower for InO compared with Blina (PPPM costs: InO = $93,767; Blina = $163,470; p = 0.021). Conclusion: In the first R/R setting, patients who used InO had significantly lower all-cause and ALL-related costs compared with patients who used Blina, in part driven by hospitalization patterns.

在首次复发/难治性急性淋巴细胞白血病患者中,实际使用伊妥珠单抗奥佐加米星的医疗费用低于blinatumomab。
目的:比较接受伊妥珠单抗-奥佐米星(InO)和布利那单抗(Blinatumomab)治疗首次复发/难治性(R/R)ALL患者的全因和急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)相关医疗资源利用率(HCRU)和成本。患者与方法:我们研究了2015年1月1日至2021年2月16日期间接受InO(29人)或Blinatumomab(23人)治疗的ALL成人商业参保者和医疗保险优势参保者的回顾性索赔。描述了平均每患者每月(PPPM)HCRU 和总费用,并计算了经多变量调整的 PPPM 全因和 ALL 相关预测总费用。结果:接受 InO 和 Blina 治疗的患者每月平均 ALL 相关住院时间相同(PPPM = 0.8 次);但接受 Blina 治疗的患者 ALL 相关住院时间几乎是 InO 的两倍(ALL 相关:InO = 7.6 天;Blina = 14.1 天;P = 0.346)。在多变量模型中,InO与ALL相关的总费用比Blina低43%(PPPM费用:InO = 93,767美元;Blina = 163,470美元;P = 0.021)。结论在第一种 R/R 环境中,与使用 Blina 的患者相比,使用 InO 的患者的全因和 ALL 相关费用明显较低,部分原因是住院模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of comparative effectiveness research
Journal of comparative effectiveness research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
121
期刊介绍: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides a rapid-publication platform for debate, and for the presentation of new findings and research methodologies. Through rigorous evaluation and comprehensive coverage, the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research provides stakeholders (including patients, clinicians, healthcare purchasers, and health policy makers) with the key data and opinions to make informed and specific decisions on clinical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信