Cost saving, patient centered algorithm for progenitor cell mobilization for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Administration of plerixafor with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilizes CD34+ cells much more effectively than G-CSF alone, but cost generally limits plerixafor use to patients at high risk of insufficient CD34+ cell collection based on low peripheral blood (PB) CD34+ counts following 4 days of G-CSF. We analyzed costs associated with administering plerixafor to patients with higher day 4 CD34+ cell counts to decrease apheresis days and explored the use of a fixed split dose of plerixafor instead of weight-based dosing. We analyzed 235 patients with plasma cell disorders or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who underwent progenitor cell mobilization and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) between March 2014 and December 2017. Two hundred ten (89%) received G-CSF plus Plerixafor and 25 (11%) received G-CSF alone. Overall, 180 patients (77%) collected in 1 day, 53 (22%) in 2 days and 2 (1%) in 3 days. Based on our data, we present a probabilistic algorithm to identify patients likely to require more than one day of collection using G-CSF alone. CD34+ cell yield, ANC and platelet recovery were not significantly different between fixed and standard dose plerixafor. Plerixafor enabled collection in 1 day and with estimated savings of $5000, compared to patients who did not receive plerixafor and required collection for three days. While collection and processing costs and patient populations vary among institutions, our results suggest re-evaluation of current algorithms.

Retrospective database analysis of healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients who develop post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease within the first year following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplants.

AIMS: Healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) patients following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) were evaluated in the USA. METHODS: MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental database claims from 01 July 2010 to 31 December 2017 were analyzed. Patients eligible for analysis received allogeneic HCT between 01 January 2011 to 31 December 2015, had ≥6 months of continuous enrollment before HCT, and had ≥1 claim for PTLD or ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims for a clinically-relevant lymphoma within 1 year following HCT (PTLD index = first claim of diagnosis). Patients with clinically-relevant lymphomas within 6 months before HCT were excluded. HRU and total paid amounts were assessed from the week before the HCT through 1-day pre-PTLD index (HCT to PTLD) and monthly from PTLD index through 1-year post-PTLD index. HRU is reported as mean (SD). Results were also provided by survival status. RESULTS: Overall, 92 patients were eligible for analysis. From HCT to PTLD, 98.9% of patients were hospitalized, with 1.7 (1.2) hospitalizations/patient. The average length of stay was 25.3 (22.2) days/patient. From HCT to PTLD, 98.9% of patients had outpatient services with 233.7 (261.1) services/patient and 91.3% of patients had a prescription fill with 32.9 (26.0) prescriptions/patient. In the first month post-PTLD index, 51.2% of patients were hospitalized. Mean paid amounts were $399,470/patient (range $7542-$1.7 M) from HCT to PTLD. Cumulative mean paid amounts 1-year post-PTLD were $429,043/patient. Total cost/patient/month was ∼7 times higher in patients who died (n = 49; $232,591) than those who lived (n = 43; $33,677). Costs were mainly driven by hospitalizations. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include those inherent to retrospective analyses (i.e. miscoding, lack of clinical detail). CONCLUSIONS: HRU and costs from HCT to PTLD were high and more than doubled within 1-year post-PTLD. PTLD patients who died had ∼7 times higher costs than those who lived, driven by hospitalizations. Effective treatments are needed to reduce the burden of PTLD.

Cost-effective approach to the diagnostic workup of B cell lymphoproliferative disorders via optimal integration of flow cytometric data.

INTRODUCTION: The workup of lymphoproliferative disorders (LPDs) involves the combined use of flow cytometry (FC) and immunohistochemistry (IHC). This often results in duplicate immunophenotypic testing and adds costs that may not be eligible for reimbursement based on the Medicare National Correct Coding Initiative. We aimed to establish a cost-effective diagnostic algorithm based on initial FC categorization to reduce repetitive immunophenotyping. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 242 cases of suspected LPDs with concurrent FC and IHC testing over a 12-month period. We correlated FC with surgical diagnoses and evaluated the frequency of repeat IHC testing. RESULTS: Repetitive immunophenotyping was common; overall, 85% of cases had at least one marker repeated. Concordant cases were significantly less likely to have markers repeated than discordant cases. Of concordant B cell malignancies, 57% represented recurrent disease; however, repeat marker usage was not decreased as compared to new diagnoses. The most frequently repeated markers were CD3, CD5, CD10, and CD20. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that in concordant cases, CD5 and CD10 should not be repeated by IHC; this would decrease the use of these markers by 80% and 76%, respectively. We developed an algorithmic approach to IHC usage that has improved incorporation of FC data at our institution and may reduce healthcare costs.

Value-based flow testing of chronic lymphoproliferative disorders: a quality improvement project to develop an algorithm to streamline testing and reduce costs.

OBJECTIVES: Flow cytometry is essential for the evaluation of lymphoproliferative disorders (LPDs) and their classification. Flow panels routinely incorporate a large array of antibodies, making testing complex and expensive; such panels are likely unnecessary in benign cases or those with straightforward diagnoses. Our aim was to develop a more cost-effective testing strategy based on a retrospective analysis of flow studies for possible LPDs in blood. METHODS: We identified LPD frequencies and types, as well as associated results with patient age and absolute lymphocyte count. RESULTS: We found that the likelihood of LPDs increased with patient age and absolute lymphocyte count and that CD5-positive LPD was the most common LPD diagnosed in our institution (71% of LPDs). Using these data, we devised flow-testing algorithms with a screening test for patients at low risk of disease and a focus on CD5-positive LPD detection, with reflexing as needed. CONCLUSIONS: We project this approach will result in a 40% decrease in antibody utilization.

Retrospective comparison of filgrastim plus plerixafor to other regimens for remobilization after primary mobilization failure: clinical and economic outcomes.

We performed a retrospective analysis to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes in patients receiving remobilization therapy after primary mobilization failure. Our primary endpoint was to compare filgrastim plus plerixafor to other regimens in their ability to collect a target cell dose of at least 2 million CD34+ cells/kg (cumulative). Of 96 consecutive patients who failed their primary mobilization therapy and in whom a second mobilization was attempted, remobilization consisted of filgrastim plus plerixafor (n = 38), filgrastim with or without sargramostim (n = 43), or chemotherapy plus filgrastim (n = 15), 84% of filgrastim/plerixafor patients were able to collect at least 2 million CD34+ cells/kg from both mobilizations, compared to 60% of patients mobilized with chemotherapy/filgrastim and 79% of the filgrastim ± sargramostim patients (P = 0.17). However, when combined with cells collected from the first mobilization, 53% of filgrastim/plerixafor patients reached the target of 2 million CD34+ cells in one apheresis, compared to 20% of those receiving chemotherapy/filgrastim and 28% of those receiving filgrastim ± sargramostim (P = 0.02). Resource utilization, mobilization drug costs, clinical care costs, and total costs were significantly different. We conclude that while filgrastim/plerixafor is the most efficient remobilization strategy, those clinical benefits may not translate into lower cost, especially when multiple days of plerixafor administration are required.

Management of febrile neutropenia--a German prospective hospital cost analysis in lymphoproliferative disorders, non-small cell lung cancer, and primary breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia/leukopenia (FN/FL) is the most frequent dose-limiting toxicity of myelosuppressive chemotherapy, but German data on economic consequences are limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, multicentre, longitudinal, observational study was carried out to evaluate the occurrence of FN/FL and its impact on health resource utilization and costs in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), lymphoproliferative disorder (LPD), and primary breast cancer (PBC) patients. Costs are presented from a hospital perspective. RESULTS: A total of 325 consecutive patients (47% LPD, 37% NSCLC, 16% PBC; 46% women; 38% age = 65 years) with 68 FN/FL episodes were evaluated. FN/FL occurred in 22% of the LPD patients, 8% of the NSCLC patients, and 27% of the PBC patients. 55 FN/FL episodes were associated with at least 1 hospital stay (LPD n = 34, NSCLC n = 10, PBC n = 11). Mean (median) cost per FN/FL episode requiring hospital care amounted to € 3,950 (€ 2,355) and varied between € 4,808 (€ 3,056) for LPD, € 3,627 (€ 2,255) for NSCLC, and € 1,827 (€ 1,969) for PBC patients. 12 FN/FL episodes (LPD n = 9, NSCLC n = 3) accounted for 60% of the total expenses. Main cost drivers were hospitalization and drugs (60 and 19% of the total costs). CONCLUSIONS: FN/FL treatment has economic relevance for hospitals. Costs vary between tumour types, being significantly higher for LPD compared to PBC patients. The impact of clinical characteristics on asymmetrically distributed costs needs further evaluation.

Health resource consumption and costs attributable to chemotherapy-induced toxicity in German routine hospital care in lymphoproliferative disorder and NSCLC patients.

BACKGROUND: Multidrug chemotherapy (CT) is still associated with relevant side-effects. We assessed, under current practice patterns, frequency and severity of CT-induced toxicity and its economic consequences. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective, multicentre, longitudinal, observational cohort study with lymphoproliferative disorder (LPD) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, receiving first- or second-line (immuno-) CT (excluding myeloablative CT). Data were collected from patient interviews and preplanned chart reviews. Costs in 2007 euros are presented from the provider perspective. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy-three patients (n = 153 LPD; n = 120 NSCLC) undergoing a total of 1004 CT cycles were assessable (age ≥65 years, 40%; female, 36%; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, 11%; tumour stage ≥III, 56%; history of comorbidity, 80%). Fifty percent of cycles were associated with grade 3/4 toxicity and 37% (n = 371) with at least one hospital stay (outpatient/day care n = 154; intensive care n = 19). Mean (median) toxicity-related costs amounted to €1032 (€86) per cycle. Costs rose exponentially with the number of grade 3/4 adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and were highest in cycles affected by more than four ADRs, €10 881 (€5455); in cycles with intensive care, €14 121 (€8833); and in cycles affected by grade 3/4 infections and febrile neutropenia/leukopenia, €7093 (€4531) and €5170 (€2899), respectively. Five percent of CT cycles accounted for 56% of total expenses. CONCLUSIONS: Individualised supportive care strategies are needed. Future research should focus on identifying toxicity clusters and patient characteristics predictive for high costs.

The modification of high-dose therapy shortens the duration of neutropaenia by delay of leucocyte nadir.

Infections during neutropaenia contribute still significantly to mortality and morbidity after high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation. Further acceleration of haemopoietic recovery seems impossible for biological reasons. Another approach to shorten neutropaenia could be to remove drugs from high-dose therapy protocols with strong contribution to immunosuppression and neutropaenia and unproven antineoplastic activity. In this retrospective matched-pair analysis, conventional busulphan/cyclophosphamide (Bu/Cy) high-dose therapy was compared to single-agent busulphan conditioning before autologous stem cell transplantation. This modification led to a significant shorter neutropaenic interval by protraction of cell decrease and to a significant mitigation of neutropaenia. After single-agent busulphan conditioning, leucocytes dropped below 1/nl at median 1.5 days later when compared to the patients from the busulphanBu/Cy control group (P=0.001). In a significant percentage of patients (n=6, 60%) leucocytes did not fall below 0.5 cells/nl at any time. In contrast, all patients from the Bu/Cy control group experienced deep neutropaenia (P=0.004). Thrombocytopaenia and requirement for transfusions of platelets or red cells were not influenced. Antineoplastic activity seemed to be preserved as determined by survival analysis. In conclusion, modification of high-dose regimen with the intention to shorten neutropaenia with preserved antitumour activity could be an approach to reduce infection-related morbidity and mortality and to consider economic necessities.

Low-dose filgrastim significantly enhances neutrophil recovery following autologous peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation in patients with lymphoproliferative disorders: evidence for clinical and economic benefit.

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical and economic benefit of low-dose (50 microg/m2) filgrastim after peripheral blood stem-cell transplantation (PBSCT) in a randomized, placebo-controlled double-blinded study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with lymphoproliferative disorders were randomized to receive low-dose filgrastim (19 patients) or placebo (19 patients) beginning on the first day after stem-cell reinfusion and continuing until absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was greater than 0.5 x 10(9)/L. All patients received greater than 2.5 x 10(6) CD34+ cells/kg, which was mobilized with chemotherapy and filgrastim 300 microg from the fifth day. An economic analysis was performed based on the outcome in the two groups. RESULTS: Neutrophil engraftment was significantly more rapid in patients who received filgrastim with a median number of days until ANC was greater that 0.5 x 10(9)/L of 10 (9 to 13) versus 14 (9 to 19; P < .0001). The time to reach an ANC greater than 1 x 109/L was 12 (9 to 14) versus 16 days (10 to 25; P < .0001). The total number of patients who required intravenous antibiotic therapy was lower in the filgrastim-treated group (68%) compared with the placebo group (89%); also, the median number of days with fever and the duration of antibiotic therapy were shorter, although these differences did not reach statistical significance. However, although only three of 19 (16%) patients who received filgrastim required amphotericin, 11 of 19 (58%) who received placebo did require it, and amphotericin usage was significantly less in the filgrastim group (P = .029). Finally, in-patient stay was significantly shortened in those who received filgrastim from 16 (13 to 23) to 13 days (11 to 18; P = .0003). CONCLUSION: Low-dose filgrastim significantly reduces neutrophil engraftment time post-PBSCT and also reduces in-patient stay and costs, which makes it economically viable for patients who are undergoing high-dose chemotherapy.