Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm ; 25(4): 428-436, 2019 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30917077

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) have a poor prognosis and high likelihood of recurrence. Routine care for incident cases in the United States involves surgical resection, followed by radiation therapy (RT) with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide. Real-world data reporting the treatments and health care burden associated with GBM are limited. OBJECTIVE: To assess patterns of care, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs associated with treatment of GBM in the United States. METHODS: This study is a retrospective claims database analysis. Adult patients with a GBM diagnosis (index date) between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2016, who had undergone brain surgery within 90 days of the index date, had received temozolomide and/or RT up to 90 days after index date, and had at least 6 months of continuous enrollment before the index date, were identified. Patients were excluded if they had (a) another primary cancer within 6 months pre-index, (b) secondary brain metastases, or (c) received temozolomide and/or RT pre-index. Baseline characteristics, treatments, HCRU, and costs were reported. First-line therapy began upon first receipt of RT and/or temozolomide after index date; second-line therapy began when a new drug was added > 28 days after initiation of first-line therapy or when there was a treatment gap > 90 days. Treatment regimens, duration of treatment (corrected group prognosis method), HCRU, and costs were reported descriptively in the 0- to 6-month and 7- to 12-month periods following initiation of first-line and second-line therapy. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between patients receiving temozolomide and/or RT. Patients receiving RT without chemotherapy tended to be older, be retired, and have more baseline comorbidities. Of the 4,071 patients receiving first-line therapy for GBM, most (73.0%) received temozolomide + RT; 24.4% received RT; and 2.5% received temozolomide monotherapy. Of those receiving first-line therapy, 1,283 (31.5%) patients subsequently received second-line therapy: 39.4% received bevacizumab monotherapy; 28.9% received bevacizumab combination therapy (temozolomide, 45.2% of patients; irinotecan, 24.3%; and temozolomide + lomustine, 15.4%); 15.5% received temozolomide monotherapy; and 13.7% received other systemic cancer therapies. The proportion of patients with hospitalizations increased from 2.9% (4-6 months pre-index) to 20.8% in the 3 months before the index date (likely due to diagnostic procedures) and 28.1% in the first 6 months after index (likely due to surgery) and then decreased to 13.3% in the 7- to 12-month period after index. Mean total per-patient costs at 6 and 12 months were $117,325 and $162,550 (first line) and $126,128 and $243,833 (second line). Costs in all time periods were largely driven by costs of RT/systemic cancer therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with newly diagnosed GBM received treatment according to recommendations. However, relatively few patients received second-line therapy, and the HCRU burden and costs associated with both lines of therapy were substantial. Novel therapies for GBM are required to improve treatment options and outcomes in these patients. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb (Princeton Pike, NJ). Neither honoraria nor payments were provided for authorship. Norden received consultancy fees relating to this study from Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dastani, Korytowsky, Le, Singh, and You are employees of Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dastani and Korytowsky are shareholders of Bristol-Myers Squibb. Bobiak was an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb at the time of this study. Preliminary data from this study were previously presented at the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research 22nd Annual International Meeting in Boston, MA, May 20-24, 2017.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Brain Neoplasms/therapy , Glioblastoma/therapy , Health Care Costs/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/economics , Bevacizumab/administration & dosage , Brain Neoplasms/economics , Cost of Illness , Databases, Factual , Female , Glioblastoma/economics , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Irinotecan/administration & dosage , Lomustine/administration & dosage , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Temozolomide/administration & dosage , Time Factors , United States , Young Adult
2.
J Med Econ ; 15(4): 786-95, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22475042

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To characterize treatment patterns and measure the economic burden associated with metastatic (mHNC) and recurrent, locally-advanced head and neck cancer (rHNC). METHODS: Administrative claims from Medicare- and privately-insured individuals during 2004-2008 were used in this retrospective database study of patients with advanced HNC. Patients diagnosed with HNC were matched 1:1 to cancer-free controls to measure the incremental economic burden of HNC. Outcomes of interest were measured during the 6 months following the date of a secondary tumor diagnosis for metastatic patients or the date of a diagnosis indicating rHNC. To assess treatment patterns, HNC patients were evaluated for the use frequency of treatments (radiotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery). Costs were reported in 2008 US$ from a third-party payer perspective and were analyzed using generalized linear models and two-part regression models adjusting for differences in age and baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index (excluding cancer diagnoses) between the HNC and control cohorts. Components of cost included inpatient, outpatient and other medical services as well as pharmacy costs. RESULTS: The mHNC cohort consisted of 1042 patients and the rHNC cohort included 324 patients. The most common treatments for mHNC patients were supportive care (90.2%), radiation therapy (48.5%), surgery (41.9%) and chemotherapy (38.3%). Patients with rHNC frequently received HNC-related supportive care (71.0%), radiation therapy (67.9%) and chemotherapy (27.2%); HNC-related surgery was infrequent (12.7%) during the study period. The 6-month incremental adjusted total costs were $60,414 per patient for mHNC and $21,141 per patient for rHNC (p<0.0001). Approximately 46-58% of the incremental cost was attributable to outpatient visits, 27-37% to inpatient costs and 11-13% to pharmacy, depending on the HNC cohort. LIMITATIONS: The identification of mHNC/rHNC was based on diagnosis codes and treatment patterns with the limitation of the claims database. CONCLUSIONS: Metastatic and recurrent, locally-advanced HNC patients frequently receive cancer-related treatments and incur substantial economic burden.


Subject(s)
Cost of Illness , Head and Neck Neoplasms/economics , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/economics , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Aged , Female , Head and Neck Neoplasms/pathology , Head and Neck Neoplasms/therapy , Humans , Insurance Claim Review , Male , Medicare , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Metastasis , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/therapy , Retrospective Studies , United States
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...