BACKGROUND: Sargramostim is a granulocyte-macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Unlike filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, which are granulocyte-colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), sargramostim activates a broader range of myeloid lineage-derived cells. Therefore, GM-CSF might reduce infection risk more than the G-CSFs. This study compared real-world infection-related hospitalization rates and costs in patients using G/GM-CSF for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. METHODS: This retrospective matched-cohort study analyzed nationally representative health insurance claims in the United States from 2000 through 2007. The sample population included patients who received chemotherapy and G/GM-CSF. G/GM-CSF treatment episodes began with the first administration of G/GM-CSF and ended when a subsequent administration was >28 days after a prior administration. Sargramostim patients were matched 1:1 with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim patients based on gender and birth year. Outcomes included infection-related hospitalization rates and the associated costs. Hospitalization rates were analyzed using univariate and multivariate Poisson methods; covariates included myelosuppressive agents received, tumor type, anemia, and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 990 sargramostim-filgrastim and 982 sargramostim-pegfilgrastim matched pairs were analyzed. Cohorts were similar with regard to age, gender, and comorbid conditions. Several differences were observed with regard to tumor type, anemia, and chemotherapy, but no systematic trends were apparent. Sargramostim patients experienced a 56% lower risk of infection-related hospitalizations compared with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim patients. Infection-related hospitalization costs were 84% and 62% lower for sargramostim patients compared with patients treated with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with or at risk for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, these data indicated that use of sargramostim was associated with a reduced risk of infection-related hospitalization and lower associated costs compared with filgrastim or pegfilgrastim. Copyright (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
BACKGROUND: Sargramostim is a granulocyte-macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF). Unlike filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, which are granulocyte-colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), sargramostim activates a broader range of myeloid lineage-derived cells. Therefore, GM-CSF might reduce infection risk more than the G-CSFs. This study compared real-world infection-related hospitalization rates and costs in patients using G/GM-CSF for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. METHODS: This retrospective matched-cohort study analyzed nationally representative health insurance claims in the United States from 2000 through 2007. The sample population included patients who received chemotherapy and G/GM-CSF. G/GM-CSF treatment episodes began with the first administration of G/GM-CSF and ended when a subsequent administration was >28 days after a prior administration. Sargramostim patients were matched 1:1 with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim patients based on gender and birth year. Outcomes included infection-related hospitalization rates and the associated costs. Hospitalization rates were analyzed using univariate and multivariate Poisson methods; covariates included myelosuppressive agents received, tumor type, anemia, and comorbidities. RESULTS: A total of 990 sargramostim-filgrastim and 982 sargramostim-pegfilgrastim matched pairs were analyzed. Cohorts were similar with regard to age, gender, and comorbid conditions. Several differences were observed with regard to tumor type, anemia, and chemotherapy, but no systematic trends were apparent. Sargramostim patients experienced a 56% lower risk of infection-related hospitalizations compared with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim patients. Infection-related hospitalization costs were 84% and 62% lower for sargramostim patients compared with patients treated with filgrastim and pegfilgrastim, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with or at risk for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, these data indicated that use of sargramostim was associated with a reduced risk of infection-related hospitalization and lower associated costs compared with filgrastim or pegfilgrastim. Copyright (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.
Authors: Derek Weycker; Xiaoyan Li; Spiros Tzivelekis; Mark Atwood; Jacob Garcia; Yanli Li; Maureen Reiner; Gary H Lyman Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2016-10-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Wendy J Langeberg; Conchitina C Siozon; John H Page; P K Morrow; Victoria M Chia Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Derek Weycker; Xiaoyan Li; John Edelsberg; Rich Barron; Alex Kartashov; Hairong Xu; Gary H Lyman Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Mi Rim Choi; Craig A Solid; Victoria M Chia; Anne H Blaes; John H Page; Richard Barron; Thomas J Arneson Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-02-04 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Alena M Pfeil; Kim Allcott; Ruth Pettengell; Gunter von Minckwitz; Matthias Schwenkglenks; Zsolt Szabo Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-10-07 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Sudeep J Karve; Gregory L Price; Keith L Davis; Gerhardt M Pohl; Emily Nash Smyth; Lee Bowman Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Derek Weycker; Oleg Sofrygin; Kim Seefeld; Robert G Deeter; Jason Legg; John Edelsberg Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-02-13 Impact factor: 2.655