A Time and Motion Study Comparing Subcutaneous Pembrolizumab Versus Intravenous Pembrolizumab in Combination with Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.

IF 4 3区医学 Q2 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL

Advances in Therapy Pub Date : 2025-10-21 DOI:10.1007/s12325-025-03365-7

Erwin De Cock, Sabine Oskar, Cecilia Lourdudoss, Renata Eiras, M Catherine Pietanza, Ashwini Arunachalam, Gustavo Alves, Gaston Lucas Martinengo, Enriqueta Felip

{"title":"A Time and Motion Study Comparing Subcutaneous Pembrolizumab Versus Intravenous Pembrolizumab in Combination with Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer.","authors":"Erwin De Cock, Sabine Oskar, Cecilia Lourdudoss, Renata Eiras, M Catherine Pietanza, Ashwini Arunachalam, Gustavo Alves, Gaston Lucas Martinengo, Enriqueta Felip","doi":"10.1007/s12325-025-03365-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of oncology therapies could provide time-saving benefits for both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) compared with intravenous (IV) delivery. This prospective observational study, conducted alongside the MK-3475A-D77 phase 3, open-label randomized clinical trial, quantifies HCP and patient time with pembrolizumab SC versus pembrolizumab IV among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.Methods: Seventeen sites across eight countries in Europe (n = 4), South America (n = 3), and Asia (n = 1) were enrolled. Primary endpoints were active HCP time; patient time in the treatment chair, treatment room, and healthcare facility; and consumables usage. Descriptive statistics included weighted mean (WM), and a linear mixed model (LMM) was employed to explore differences in time measures between pembrolizumab SC and pembrolizumab IV per visit.Results: Overall, 212 observations were analyzed (153 SC and 59 IV). Total active HCP time was reduced by 45.6% with SC versus IV (WM, 14.0 vs 25.8 min); HCPs spent 44.3% less time on the drug preparation process with SC versus IV (WM, 5.1 vs 9.1 min) and 46.3% less time on the drug administration process with SC versus IV (WM, 8.9 vs 16.7 min). Patient chair time was reduced by 49.6% with SC versus IV (WM, 59.0 vs 117.2 min). Patients receiving SC spent less time in the treatment room than those receiving IV (WM, 66.7 vs 126.9 min; difference - 47.4%). Exploratory LMM showed considerable between-group differences for active HCP time and patient time in the treatment chair and treatment room.Conclusion: Pembrolizumab SC substantially reduces active HCP time and patient chair time versus pembrolizumab IV. Time liberated for HCPs could be reallocated toward additional patient care activities, while optimized chair utilization could improve overall healthcare efficiency.","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-025-03365-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Subcutaneous (SC) formulations of oncology therapies could provide time-saving benefits for both patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) compared with intravenous (IV) delivery. This prospective observational study, conducted alongside the MK-3475A-D77 phase 3, open-label randomized clinical trial, quantifies HCP and patient time with pembrolizumab SC versus pembrolizumab IV among patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer.

Methods: Seventeen sites across eight countries in Europe (n = 4), South America (n = 3), and Asia (n = 1) were enrolled. Primary endpoints were active HCP time; patient time in the treatment chair, treatment room, and healthcare facility; and consumables usage. Descriptive statistics included weighted mean (WM), and a linear mixed model (LMM) was employed to explore differences in time measures between pembrolizumab SC and pembrolizumab IV per visit.

Results: Overall, 212 observations were analyzed (153 SC and 59 IV). Total active HCP time was reduced by 45.6% with SC versus IV (WM, 14.0 vs 25.8 min); HCPs spent 44.3% less time on the drug preparation process with SC versus IV (WM, 5.1 vs 9.1 min) and 46.3% less time on the drug administration process with SC versus IV (WM, 8.9 vs 16.7 min). Patient chair time was reduced by 49.6% with SC versus IV (WM, 59.0 vs 117.2 min). Patients receiving SC spent less time in the treatment room than those receiving IV (WM, 66.7 vs 126.9 min; difference - 47.4%). Exploratory LMM showed considerable between-group differences for active HCP time and patient time in the treatment chair and treatment room.

Conclusion: Pembrolizumab SC substantially reduces active HCP time and patient chair time versus pembrolizumab IV. Time liberated for HCPs could be reallocated toward additional patient care activities, while optimized chair utilization could improve overall healthcare efficiency.

查看原文本刊更多论文

一项比较皮下派姆单抗与静脉派姆单抗联合化疗治疗转移性非小细胞肺癌的时间和运动研究。

与静脉（IV）递送相比，肿瘤治疗的皮下（SC）制剂可以为患者和医疗保健专业人员（HCPs）提供节省时间的好处。这项前瞻性观察性研究与MK-3475A-D77 3期开放标签随机临床试验一起进行，量化了转移性非小细胞肺癌患者使用派姆单抗SC和派姆单抗IV的HCP和患者时间。方法：纳入欧洲（n = 4）、南美（n = 3）和亚洲（n = 1） 8个国家的17个研究点。主要终点为活跃HCP时间；患者在治疗椅、治疗室和医疗机构的时间；消耗品的使用。描述性统计包括加权平均值（WM），并采用线性混合模型（LMM）来探讨派姆单抗SC和派姆单抗IV次就诊之间的时间测量差异。结果：总共分析了212例观察结果（153例SC和59例IV）。与IV组相比，SC组总有效HCP时间缩短45.6% (WM组，14.0 min vs 25.8 min)；与静脉注射相比，HCPs在SC药物制备过程中花费的时间减少了44.3% (WM, 5.1 vs 9.1 min)，在药物给药过程中花费的时间减少了46.3% （WM, 8.9 vs 16.7 min）。SC组与IV组相比，患者静坐时间减少了49.6% （WM组59.0分钟vs 117.2分钟）。接受SC的患者在治疗室的时间少于接受静脉注射的患者（WM, 66.7 vs 126.9 min；差异- 47.4%）。探索性LMM在活性HCP时间和患者在治疗椅和治疗室的时间上显示出相当大的组间差异。结论：与Pembrolizumab IV相比，Pembrolizumab SC显著减少了HCP活性时间和患者椅子时间。释放给HCP的时间可以重新分配给额外的患者护理活动，而优化的椅子利用率可以提高整体医疗效率。

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

Advances in Therapy 医学-药学

CiteScore

7.20

自引率

2.60%

发文量

353

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Advances in Therapy is an international, peer reviewed, rapid-publication (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance) journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of therapeutics and interventions (including devices) across all therapeutic areas. Studies relating to diagnostics and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged. The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Advances in Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.