Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Chemotherapy-based versus chemotherapy-free stem cell mobilization (± plerixafor) in multiple myeloma patients: an Italian cost-effectiveness analysis.
Lazzaro, Carlo; Castagna, Luca; Lanza, Francesco; Laszlo, Daniele; Milone, Giuseppe; Pierelli, Luca; Saccardi, Riccardo.
Affiliation
  • Lazzaro C; Health Economist and Research Director, Studio di Economia Sanitaria, Milan, Italy. carlo.lazzaro@tiscalinet.it.
  • Castagna L; Oncology and Haematology Unit, BMT section, Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Rozzano, Italy.
  • Lanza F; Hematology Section, Romagna Transplant Network, University Hospital "Santa Maria delle Croci", Ravenna, Italy.
  • Laszlo D; Stem Cell Mobilization and Collection Unit, IEO IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
  • Milone G; Hematology and BMT Unit, Azienda Policlinico Vittorio Emanuele, Catania, Italy.
  • Pierelli L; Department of Experimental Medicine, University "Sapienza", Rome, Immune-hematology and Transfusion Medicine Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera San Camillo, Rome, Italy.
  • Saccardi R; Department of Cellular Therapy and Transfusion Medicine, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Bone Marrow Transplant ; 56(8): 1876-1887, 2021 08.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33753907
ABSTRACT
Given the availability and efficacy of the mobilizing agent plerixafor in augmenting hematopoietic progenitor cell mobilization with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), there is a strong case for comparing the cost-effectiveness of mobilization with G-CSF + cyclophosphamide versus G-CSF alone. This study investigated the cost and effectiveness (i.e., successful 4 million-CD34+ collection) of G-CSF alone versus high-dose cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2) + G-CSF mobilization (± on-demand plerixafor) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) eligible for autograft in Italy. A decision tree-supported cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) model in MM patients was developed from the societal perspective. The CEA model compared G-CSF alone with cyclophosphamide 4 g/m2 + G-CSF (± on-demand plerixafor) and was populated with demographic, healthcare and non-healthcare resource utilization data collected from a questionnaire administered to six Italian oncohematologists. Costs were expressed in Euro (€) 2019. The CEA model showed that G-CSF alone was strongly dominant versus cyclophosphamide + G-CSF ( ± on-demand plerixafor), with incremental savings of €1198.59 and an incremental probability of a successful 4 million-CD34+ apheresis (+0.052). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base-case results. In conclusion, chemotherapy-free mobilization (± on-demand plerixafor) is a "good value for money" option for MM patients eligible for autograft.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation / Heterocyclic Compounds / Multiple Myeloma Type of study: Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Journal subject: TRANSPLANTE Year: 2021 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Italy

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation / Heterocyclic Compounds / Multiple Myeloma Type of study: Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Country/Region as subject: Europa Language: En Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Journal subject: TRANSPLANTE Year: 2021 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Italy