Assessing the transition from intravenous to subcutaneous delivery of rituximab: Benefits for payers, health care professionals, and patients with lymphoma

Subcutaneous (SC) administration of rituximab provides an opportunity for reduced patient treatment burden and increased healthcare efficiencies as an alternative to intravenous (IV) rituximab. There is minimal evidence comparing costs associated with SC and IV rituximab in a US setting. This research assessed the impact of transitioning patients from IV to SC rituximab for treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) from the US payer, provider, and patient perspective. We developed a model to estimate cost differences for transitioning 20% of a patient cohort from IV to SC rituximab. We included patients with incident diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, incident and recurrent follicular lymphoma, and incident and recurrent chronic lymphocytic leukemia. In the model, each patient received the same number of doses and that there was no difference in discontinuation between cohorts due to non-inferior efficacy and a similar safety profile. Model inputs were collected from published literature and publicly available data. Scenario analyses tested the impact of availability of low-cost biosimilars. In the base case (1,000,000 covered lives), we estimated a total of 157 patients, with 769 total drug administrations. A transition of 20% of patients from IV to SC was projected to generate $153,000 in payer savings, increase provider capacity by 270 hours, and free 470 hours of patient time. Scenario analyses suggest SC administration will be cost saving for payers even with a market where biosimilars approach 50% market share. A 20% transition to SC rituximab in a single cohort of patients has the potential to generate significant US health system value in the form of payer savings, increased practice capacity, and patient time.

Early intravenous iron administration in the Emergency Department reduces red blood cell unit transfusion, hospitalisation, re-transfusion, length of stay and costs

BACKGROUND

Moderate to severe iron deficiency anaemia is a common finding in patients admitted to the Emergency Department (ED). According to Patient Blood Management principles, intravenous iron should be the therapy of choice instead of blood transfusion for selected cases affected by chronic iron deficiency anaemia. However, this option is only rarely taken into account by physicians in the ED. As a result, in many circumstances, treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in the ED can differ from that of the Anaemia Clinic. With the aim of reducing inappropriate transfusions, and to implement intravenous iron usage, we shared a specific protocol with the ED.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of all subjects admitted to the ED (n=267, Post-protocol group) with hemoglobin ≤9.0 g/dL and mean corpuscular volume <80 fL in a 13-month period, except if the massive transfusion protocol was activated, and results were compared with an equivalent Pre-protocol historical cohort (n=226).

RESULTS

In comparison with the Pre-protocol series, the number of patients transfused did not change, but the appropriateness in terms of transfusion and red blood cell volume transfused improved sharply (87.0 vs 13.3%; p<0.001) with a significant increase in intravenous iron administration (50.2 vs 4.4% of cases; p<0.001). As a positive consequence, both the time spent in the ED by patients who were then directly discharged and costs per subject treated dropped by 37.9% and 59.0%, respectively. Treatment with infusion only in comparison with transfusion only led to a statistically significant Relative Risk reduction in transfusion on the ward and post-discharge transfusion of 55.6% and 44.4%, respectively.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of Patient Blood Management principles and early intravenous iron therapy in the Emergency Department have proved to be effective tools to optimise resources both in terms of units transfused and costs.

A Cost Minimization Analysis of Ready-to-Administer Prefilled Sterilized Syringes in a Dutch Hospital

PURPOSE

Preparation errors occur frequently during conventional preparation of parenteral medication in the clinical environment, causing patient harm and costs for the national health care system. The use of ready-to-administer prefilled sterilized syringes (PFSSs) produced by the hospital pharmacy can reduce preparation errors and the risk of bacteremia from contamination of the intravenous medication. The aim of this research is to compare the total costs of the conventional preparation method (CPM) with the PFSS method.

METHODS

In this cost-minimization analysis, costs related to the preparation of the medication, bacteremia from contamination, adverse drug events as a result of preparation medication errors, and wastage of syringes were taken into account. Annual costs in a general Dutch hospital were consistently calculated. Three scenarios were analyzed: (1) all preparations as CPM (864,246 administrations per year), (2) all preparations as PFSSs, and (3) 50% as PFSSs and 50% as CPM. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

FINDINGS

The first scenario found higher annual costs at €14.0 million (US$16.0 million) compared with the second scenario (€4.1 million, US$4.7 million). The most realistic situation (third scenario) found savings of €4.9 million (US$5.6 million) compared with the first scenario. Sensitivity analyses revealed that cost savings of PFSSs were strongly influenced by decreased risk of medication errors and contamination of intravenous medication. Extrapolating these results nationwide indicated potential savings of >€300 million (US$342 million) if only PFSSs were used.

IMPLICATIONS

The use of PFSSs prepared in the hospital pharmacy yielded cost savings compared with the CPM on the ward in the Dutch hospital.

Subcutaneous Administration of Biotherapeutics: An Overview of Current Challenges and Opportunities

Subcutaneous delivery of biotherapeutics has become a valuable alternative to intravenous administration across many disease areas. Although the pharmacokinetic profiles of subcutaneous and intravenous formulations differ, subcutaneous administration has proven effective, safe, well-tolerated, generally preferred by patients and healthcare providers and to result in reduced drug delivery-related healthcare costs and resource use. The aim of this article is to discuss the differences between subcutaneous and intravenous dosing from both health-economic and scientific perspectives. The article covers different indications, treatment settings, administration volumes, and injection devices. We focus on biotherapeutics in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), immunoglobulin-replacement therapy in primary immunodeficiency (PI), beta interferons in multiple sclerosis (MS), and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in oncology. While most subcutaneous biotherapeutics in RA, PI, and MS are self-administered at home, mAbs for oncology are still only approved for administration in a healthcare setting. Beside concerns around the safety of biotherapeutics in oncology, a key challenge for self-administration in this area is that doses and dosing volumes can be comparatively large; however, this difficulty has recently been overcome to some extent by the development of high-concentration solutions, the use of infusion pumps, and the coadministration of the dispersion enhancer hyaluronidase. Furthermore, given the increasing number of biotherapeutics being considered for combination therapy and the high dosing complexity associated with these, especially when administered intravenously, subcutaneous delivery of fixed-dose combinations might be an alternative that will diminish these burdens on healthcare systems.

Cost-effectiveness of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy: a simulation modelling approach

Objectives

In the UK, patients who require intravenous antimicrobial (IVA) treatment may receive this in the community through outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) services. Services include: IVA administration at a hospital outpatient clinic (HO); IVA administration at home by a general nurse (GN) or a specialist nurse (SN); or patient self-administered (SA) IVA administration following training. There is uncertainty regarding which OPAT services represent value for money; this study aimed to estimate their cost-effectiveness.

Methods

A cost-effectiveness decision-analytic model was developed using a simulation technique utilizing data from hospital records and a systematic review of the literature. The model estimates cost per QALY gained from the National Health Service (NHS) perspective for short- and long-term treatment of infections and service combinations across these.

Results

In short-term treatments, HO was estimated as the most effective (0.7239 QALYs), but at the highest cost (£973). SN was the least costly (£710), producing 0.7228 QALYs. The combination between SN and HO was estimated to produce 0.7235 QALYs at a cost of £841. For long-term treatments, SN was the most effective (0.677 QALYs), costing £2379, while SA was the least costly at £1883, producing 0.666 QALYs. A combination of SA and SN was estimated to produce 0.672 QALYs at a cost of £2128.

Conclusions

SN and SA are cost-effective for short- and long-term treatment of infections, while combining services may represent the second-best alternative for OPAT in the UK.

IV antibiotic therapy in the community: clinically effective and cost effective

This article discusses how the introduction of new ways of working has resulted in a more cost-effective service for the delivery of intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy in a community setting. When community IV therapy was originally initiated in the trust, the system involved two nurses to check calculations and oversee the administration of IV antibiotic therapy. However, as the demand for IV therapy escalated, and with some patients requiring multiple visits, pressures on community nursing teams created challenges relating to capacity and demand. This service improvement project involved two phases. Phase one examined patient safety and the administration of IV antibiotics by one nurse. Phase two reviewed the administration of IV antibiotic via a timed bolus route. Following the analysis, the implementation of these initiatives demonstrated maximisation of resources, a release of nurses' time to care and improvements to the patient experience.

Economic and clinical aspects of intravenous versus oral busulfan in adult patients for conditioning prior to HSCT

PURPOSE

Busulfan (BU) used as cytoreductive conditioning prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is available as intravenous (IV) and oral (O) preparation. IV-BU has clinical advantages associated with relevant incremental costs. The aim was to determine the economic impact of IV-BU versus O-BU in adult HSCT recipients from a German health care providers' perspective.

METHODS

A budget-impact model (BIM) including costs and risks for oral mucositis (OM), infection with OM, and hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (SOS) was developed. Model inputs are literature data comparing clinical effects of IV-BU versus O-BU and German cost data (conditioning therapy, treatment of OM, infections, SOS without/with multiorgan failure) from literature and tariff lists.

RESULTS

Base case calculations resulted the following: total costs of adverse events were €86,434 with O-BU and €44,376 with IV-BU for ten patients each. Considering costs of adverse events and drugs, about €5840 for ten patients receiving IV-BU are saved. Sensitivity analyses were conducted in several ways. Cost savings range between €4910 and €12,640 per ten patients for all adverse events and €2070 or €1140 per ten patients considering SOS only. Drug treatment of SOS and treatment of multiorgan failure during severe SOS are major cost drivers. Worst case scenario calculations (assuming -25% risk of all adverse events for O-BU and +25% for IV-BU) yield up to €27,570 per ten patients with IV-BU.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering costs of adverse events and drugs, IV-BU is the dominant alternative from a German providers' perspective. For more comprehensive economic evaluations, additional epidemiological data, evidence on clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, and treatment patterns are needed.

Assessing the economic value of avoiding hospital admissions by shifting the management of gram+ acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections to an outpatient care setting

OBJECTIVE

To estimate, from a US payer perspective, the cost offsets of treating gram positive acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI) with varied hospital length of stay (LOS) followed by outpatient care, as well as the cost implications of avoiding hospital admission.

METHODS

Economic drivers of care were estimated using a literature-based economic model incorporating inpatient and outpatient components. The model incorporated equal efficacy, adverse events (AE), resource use, and costs from literature. Costs of once- and twice-daily outpatient infusions to achieve a 14-day treatment were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses were performed. Costs were adjusted to 2015 US$.

RESULTS

Total non-drug medical cost for treatment of ABSSSI entirely in the outpatient setting to avoid hospital admission was the lowest among all scenarios and ranged from $4039-$4924. Total non-drug cost for ABSSSI treated in the inpatient setting ranged from $9813 (3 days LOS) to $18,014 (7 days LOS). Inpatient vs outpatient cost breakdown was: 3 days inpatient ($6657)/11 days outpatient ($3156-$3877); 7 days inpatient ($15,017)/7 days outpatient ($2495-$2997). Sensitivity analyses revealed a key outpatient cost driver to be peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) costs (average per patient cost of $873 for placement and $205 for complications).

LIMITATIONS

Drug and indirect costs were excluded and resource use was not differentiated by ABSSSI type. It was assumed that successful ABSSSI treatment takes up to 14 days per the product labels, and that once-daily and twice-daily antibiotics have equal efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Shifting ABSSSI care to outpatient settings may result in medical cost savings greater than 53%. Typical outpatient scenarios represent 14-37% of total medical cost, with PICC accounting for 28-43% of the outpatient burden. The value of new ABSSSI therapies will be driven by eliminating the need for PICC line, reducing length of stay and the ability to completely avoid a hospital stay.

An audit into the reasons why treatment was not completed as planned under intravenous sedation in an adult oral surgery department, and the cost implications

This audit aimed to identify the prevalence of, and reasons for failed intravenous conscious sedation in an adult oral surgery department, to develop recommendations to reduce such failures and to identify any cost implications. Data were collected prospectively for three months for all intravenous sedation appointments in the Oral Surgery department. Data were collected for 109 sedation appointments of which 83 were successful (76%). The failure rate (24%) was higher than the acceptable departmental failure rate (10%), and included reasons for failure that should have been avoided by a thorough patient assessment prior to treatment. Of the 26 failures, the most common reasons for failure were: cancellation: 8 patients (30.8%), failure to attend: 6 patients (23.1%), excessively late arrival of patient: 4 patients (15.4%) and failure to cannulate: 3 patients (11.6%). When sedation was unsuccessful, 13 of the 26 patients (50%) had their treatment successfully completed under local anaesthesia alone, 10 patients (38%) were rebooked for sedation and 3 patient. (12%) were rebooked for a general anaesthetic. Identifying and correcting the reasons for failure can result in vast savings in appointment time, clinical resources and cost. That 13 patients subsequently had their treatment completed under local anaesthesia alone opens the debate on how rigorous the patient assessment and allocation of sedation appointments was, and the potential to achieve savings.

Administration costs of intravenous chemotherapy in treating peripheral T-cell lymphoma

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective cohort analysis was conducted to examine the cost components of administering IV chemotherapy to peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) patients in the US to inform decision makers.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with PTCL (ICD-9 code 202.7X) between 1 October 2007 and 30 September 2012 were identified from a US administrative claims database. Costs for patients receiving at least one NCCN recommended IV chemotherapy were assessed using the allowed payment from claim line items, categorized into cost components (study drug costs, IV administration costs and other visit-related services).

RESULTS

The mean costs to the payer for IV cancer therapy administration in a PTCL patient population averaged about $5735 per visit and $9356 per member per month (PMPM). Across all therapies, mean IV administration costs accounted for $127-$794 per visit and $594-$1808 PMPM, contributing an additional 2-32% to the total costs of the drug alone. Mean other visit-related services costs for treating PTCL accounted for $70-$2487 per visit and $444-$3094 PMPM, contributing an additional 2-74% to the total costs. Combined, these additional costs represent an additional mean cost of $220-$3150 per visit and $1193-$4609 PMPM to the base price of the drug alone.

LIMITATIONS

This study used a convenience sample to identify PTCL patients and only included visits where at least one NCCN recommended IV chemotherapy was administered.

CONCLUSIONS

The costs of IV administration and other visit-related services add measurable costs to the total cost of IV therapy for treating PTCL. When considering the cost of the drug, these additional costs can represent a substantial proportion of the overall costs and must be considered when evaluating the costs of IV treatment options for PTCL.

Subcutaneous vs intravenous rituximab in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a time and motion study in the United Kingdom

OBJECTIVE

Rituximab is part of standard therapy for many non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) patients, and is usually administered as an intravenous (IV) infusion. A formulation for subcutaneous (SC) injection will be available from June 2014. A time and motion study was conducted to investigate the staff time and costs associated with administration of SC and IV rituximab.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The time and motion study was conducted in three UK centers alongside a phase III trial of SC rituximab in patients with NHL (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01461928). Active healthcare professional (HCP) time spent on the preparation and administration of IV and SC rituximab was recorded and used to calculate the associated costs.

RESULTS

Total active HCP time associated with administration of IV rituximab was 223.3 min (95% CI = 218.0-228.7), vs 48.5 min (95% CI = 45.5-51.6) for SC rituximab, a saving of 174.8 min (95% CI = 172.5-177.1) per session. Patient time in the treatment room was 263.8 min (95% CI = 236.6-294.3) for IV rituximab and 70.0 min (95% CI = 57.1-87.2) for SC rituximab, per session. The SC formulation reduced total mean staff costs by £115.17 (95% CI = 98.95-136.93) per session. Differing monitoring scenarios during infusion consistently showed time and cost savings for SC rituximab.

LIMITATIONS

Study limitations include the non-interventional design and lack of statistical power, and the investigational nature of SC rituximab. The data collected did not account for patient and center characteristics and variability on active HCP time.

CONCLUSIONS

SC rituximab was associated with reduced active HCP time and costs vs IV rituximab, as well as reduced patient time in the treatment room. Switching from IV to SC rituximab could increase treatment room capacity and patient throughput, as well as improving the patient experience.

Cost analysis of an intravenous to subcutaneous epoetin α conversion

BACKGROUND/AIMS

A cost analysis of a conversion from intravenous (IV) to subcutaneous (SC) epoetin α in patients receiving chronic in-center hemodialysis (HD).

METHODS

This retrospective analysis compared epoetin α drug costs during a 6-month period of IV usage (July to December 2010, period 1) to a 6-month period of SC usage (July to December 2011, period 2) in four large in-center HD units. Data were collected from quarterly counts of HD patients receiving epoetin α and monthly inventory billing records.

RESULTS

622 HD patients who received IV epoetin α (period 1) were compared to 609 HD patients who received SC epoetin α (period 2). A 12.6% decrease in dose was observed. The average weekly cost of epoetin α was USD 173.02 per patient during the IV period versus USD 151.20 per patient during the SC period. This equated to a yearly cost savings of USD 1,135 per patient with SC epoetin α.

CONCLUSION

The switch from IV to SC epoetin α was successfully implemented in all four centers and realized significant cost savings.

Oral sodium thiosulfate as maintenance therapy for calcific uremic arteriolopathy: a case series

BACKGROUND

Calcific uremic arteriolopathy (CUA) is a rare but serious disorder affecting 4% of dialysis patients. Intravenous sodium thiosulfate (IV STS) has been shown as an effective treatment. In Canada, the average cost of IV STS is about CAD 12,000 per month, while the cost of compounded oral STS is CAD 45 per month.

METHODS

Prospective cohort where all patients diagnosed with CUA during the year 2011 were included. They were treated initially with IV STS. Afterwards, each patient had a baseline bone scan and was started on oral STS for a total of 6 months followed by a repeat bone scan. A single radiologist, blinded to the dates of both scans for a given patient, read all scans.

RESULTS

Four patients were studied. The intravenous dose used was 25 g three times a week for an average duration of 131 days. After the maintenance therapy, 2 patients developed further regression of the lesions, 1 had stable lesions, and 1 got worse; however, nonadherence to the drug was confirmed. The oral medication was well tolerated with no reported side effects.

CONCLUSION

Oral STS, after IV STS, seems to stabilize, or even improve CUA lesions, and therefore could be useful as maintenance therapy, especially since its cost is much more reasonable than IV STS and due to the ongoing shortage of the IV formulation.