Current medical research and opinion · 2009
Economic implications of using pegfilgrastim rather than conventional G-CSF to prevent neutropenia during small-cell lung cancer chemotherapy.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tan Sean P, Chouaid C, Hettler D, Baud M, Hejblum G, Tilleul P
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: For the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile aplasia, a single injection of pegfilgrastim per cycle has the same efficacy as six to ten injections of conventional granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF). However, there are few data on the economic impact of pegfilgrastim use, especially in the context of small-cell lung cancer.
METHODS: This retrospective study involved 31 patients and 129 treatment cycles (32 with pegfilgrastim and 97 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)). We estimated the direct costs for preventing and managing febrile aplasia from the payer's perspective and also conducted a willingness-to-pay study with 100 healthy subjects, in order to estimate how highly a single-jab strategy was valued relative to multiple injections.
RESULTS: The costs per cycle were respectively 1743 euros+/- 837 euros and 1466 euros +/- 836 euros for the pegfilgrastim and G-CSF strategies (p < 0.001). The excess cost of the pegfilgrastim strategy was partly compensated for by the perceived value of the single-jab strategy: 88% of interviewees would prefer the pegfilgrastim strategy; 16% would be willing to pay all the excess cost (277 euros) and 67% would be willing to pay half the excess cost.
CONCLUSION: In this willingness-to-pay survey, the excess cost associated with pegfilgrastim relative to other G-CSF-based prophylactic strategies is partly offset by the perceived convenience of a single injection.
METHODS: This retrospective study involved 31 patients and 129 treatment cycles (32 with pegfilgrastim and 97 with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF)). We estimated the direct costs for preventing and managing febrile aplasia from the payer's perspective and also conducted a willingness-to-pay study with 100 healthy subjects, in order to estimate how highly a single-jab strategy was valued relative to multiple injections.
RESULTS: The costs per cycle were respectively 1743 euros+/- 837 euros and 1466 euros +/- 836 euros for the pegfilgrastim and G-CSF strategies (p < 0.001). The excess cost of the pegfilgrastim strategy was partly compensated for by the perceived value of the single-jab strategy: 88% of interviewees would prefer the pegfilgrastim strategy; 16% would be willing to pay all the excess cost (277 euros) and 67% would be willing to pay half the excess cost.
CONCLUSION: In this willingness-to-pay survey, the excess cost associated with pegfilgrastim relative to other G-CSF-based prophylactic strategies is partly offset by the perceived convenience of a single injection.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdultAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCost of IllnessFemaleFilgrastimGranulocyte Colony-Stimulating FactorHealth Care CostsHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedModels, EconomicNeutropeniaPatient Acceptance of Health CarePolyethylene GlycolsRecombinant ProteinsRetrospective StudiesSmall Cell Lung CarcinomaSocioeconomic Factors