Nutritional support during the hospital stay is cost-effective for preventing adverse outcomes in patients with cancer.

Objective: Among patients with cancer, malnutrition remains common and is a key challenge in oncology practice today. A prior study from our group revealed that malnourished cancer inpatients who got nutritional treatment (intervention group) had lower mortality and improved functional and quality of life outcomes compared to inpatients without nutritional support (control group). Our present analysis aimed to determine whether the improved patient recovery by nutritional support was paralleled by cost-effectiveness of this nutritional care. Methods: We analyzed hospital costs and health outcomes in patients with cancer, using a Markov simulation model with daily cycles to analyze the economic impact of nutritional support in malnourished inpatients with malignancies. We compared results for a nutritional intervention group and a control group across a 30-day timeframe. Five health states were designated (malnourished but stable, complications, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, discharge, death). Costs for the different health states were based on publicly available data for the Swiss medical system. Total patient cost categories included in-hospital nutrition, days spent in the normal ward, days in the ICU, and medical complications. Results: Total per-patient costs for in-hospital supportive nutrition was Swiss francs (CHF) 129. Across a 30-day post-admission interval, our model determined average overall costs of care of CHF 46,420 per-patient in the intervention group versus CHF 43,711 in the control group-a difference of CHF 2,709 per patient. Modeled results showed a cost of CHF 1,788 to prevent one major complication, CHF 4,464 to prevent one day in the ICU, and CHF 3,345 to prevent one death. Recovery benefits of nutritional care were thus paralleled by cost-effectiveness of this care. Conclusion: In-hospital nutritional support for oncology patients at nutritional risk is a low-cost intervention that has both clinical and financial benefits.

Economic Evaluation of Individualized Nutritional Support for Hospitalized Patients with Chronic Heart Failure.

Background Malnutrition is a highly prevalent risk factor in hospitalized patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). A recent randomized trial found lower mortality and improved health outcomes when CHF patients with nutritional risk received individualized nutritional treatment. Objective To estimate the cost-effectiveness of individualized nutritional support in hospitalized patients with CHF. Methods This analysis used data from CHF patients at risk of malnutrition (N = 645) who were part of the Effect of Early Nutritional Therapy on Frailty, Functional Outcomes and Recovery of Undernourished Medical Inpatients Trial (EFFORT). Study patients with CHF were randomized into (i) an intervention group (individualized nutritional support to reach energy, protein, and micronutrient goals) or (ii) a control group (receiving standard hospital food). We used a Markov model with daily cycles (over a 6-month interval) to estimate hospital costs and health outcomes in the comparator groups, thus modeling cost-effectiveness ratios of nutritional interventions. Results With nutritional support, the modeled total additional cost over the 6-month interval was 15,159 Swiss Francs (SF). With an additional 5.77 life days, the overall incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for nutritional support vs. no nutritional support was 2625 SF per life day gained. In terms of complications, patients receiving nutritional support had a cost savings of 6214 SF and an additional 4.11 life days without complications, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for avoided complications of 1513 SF per life day gained. Conclusions On the basis of a Markov model, this economic analysis found that in-hospital nutritional support for CHF patients increased life expectancy at an acceptable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

A Cost Impact Analysis of clonoSEQ® as a Valid and CE-Certified Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Diagnostic Compared to No MRD Testing in Multiple Myeloma in Germany.

INTRODUCTION: The measurement of minimal residual disease (MRD) with clonoSEQ® can be used in the assessment of B-cell lymphoid tumor burden throughout treatment with accuracy, sensitivity and standardization when compared to traditional cytomorphology. With the approval of novel treatments, standardized MRD assessment with improved performance is increasingly important. The aim of this analysis is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of MRD testing with clonoSEQ® compared to no MRD testing for patients with multiple myeloma (MM) on maintenance therapy in Germany. METHODS: The cost impact of clonoSEQ® was analyzed from the German statutory insurance perspective. Clinical data were derived from the literature and expert opinions. Cost input was utilized based on publicly available data and literature. Patients in the MRD arm were tested every 6 months. The deterministic Markov model consists of six health states, and every patient begins at the start of maintenance. Included therapies are lenalidomide for maintenance and carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone for relapse. RESULTS: For a time horizon of 10 years, the deterministic cost impact analysis shows total cost of €279,483 for patients using clonoSEQ® in comparison to €356,623 for simulated patients without MRD testing. The main drivers of the cost differences are saved cost of drug holiday. The savings per patient in 1 year are €18,396. Savings after 3 years are €69,991 per patient. Savings after 10 years are €77,140 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the underlying model, clonoSEQ® can support German health insurance funds to use high-cost drugs more efficiently in the treatment of myeloma.