PURPOSE: Practice guidelines do not recommend the routine use of colony-stimulating factors when there is a low risk (< 10%) of febrile neutropenia (FN). We prospectively determined whether expert peer-to-peer consultation with prescribing oncologists would improve adherence to guidelines and whether there would be any adverse events associated with that adherence. METHODS: Commencing in March 2010, we reviewed requests for pegfilgrastim from 22 community oncology practices comprising 78 physicians providing service to approximately 97,000 Medicare members. Paid claims data on all chemotherapy and supportive care medications were reviewed from fourth quarter (Q4) 2009 through third quarter (Q3) 2010. In total, 82 patients received pegfilgrastim. If the prescribed chemotherapy was associated with a low risk (< 10%) for FN, then a peer review was initiated. The treating physician made the final decision to use, or not use, pegfilgrastim, and no denials were issued. RESULTS: A total of 245 units (1 unit = 6 mg) of pegfilgrastim were administered during the four quarters analyzed. Use in the low-risk category decreased from 52 units in Q4 2009 to 15 units in Q3 2010. The per-member per-month (PMPM) cost of pegfilgrastim decreased across quarters, with an average cost of $1.07 PMPM for Q4 2009 and $0.57 PMPM for Q3 2010. No studied patient was admitted for neutropenic fever. CONCLUSION: Active expert peer-to-peer consultation with prescribing oncologists can promote adherence to guidelines and potentially lead to significant cost reductions without significant risk of neutropenic fever, with or without hospitalization, for patients with cancer.
PURPOSE: Practice guidelines do not recommend the routine use of colony-stimulating factors when there is a low risk (< 10%) of febrile neutropenia (FN). We prospectively determined whether expert peer-to-peer consultation with prescribing oncologists would improve adherence to guidelines and whether there would be any adverse events associated with that adherence. METHODS: Commencing in March 2010, we reviewed requests for pegfilgrastim from 22 community oncology practices comprising 78 physicians providing service to approximately 97,000 Medicare members. Paid claims data on all chemotherapy and supportive care medications were reviewed from fourth quarter (Q4) 2009 through third quarter (Q3) 2010. In total, 82 patients received pegfilgrastim. If the prescribed chemotherapy was associated with a low risk (< 10%) for FN, then a peer review was initiated. The treating physician made the final decision to use, or not use, pegfilgrastim, and no denials were issued. RESULTS: A total of 245 units (1 unit = 6 mg) of pegfilgrastim were administered during the four quarters analyzed. Use in the low-risk category decreased from 52 units in Q4 2009 to 15 units in Q3 2010. The per-member per-month (PMPM) cost of pegfilgrastim decreased across quarters, with an average cost of $1.07 PMPM for Q4 2009 and $0.57 PMPM for Q3 2010. No studied patient was admitted for neutropenic fever. CONCLUSION: Active expert peer-to-peer consultation with prescribing oncologists can promote adherence to guidelines and potentially lead to significant cost reductions without significant risk of neutropenic fever, with or without hospitalization, for patients with cancer.
Authors: H Ozer; J O Armitage; C L Bennett; J Crawford; G D Demetri; P A Pizzo; C A Schiffer; T J Smith; G Somlo; J C Wade; J L Wade; R J Winn; A J Wozniak; M R Somerfield Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2000-10-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Thomas J Smith; James Khatcheressian; Gary H Lyman; Howard Ozer; James O Armitage; Lodovico Balducci; Charles L Bennett; Scott B Cantor; Jeffrey Crawford; Scott J Cross; George Demetri; Christopher E Desch; Philip A Pizzo; Charles A Schiffer; Lee Schwartzberg; Mark R Somerfield; George Somlo; James C Wade; James L Wade; Rodger J Winn; Antoinette J Wozniak; Antonio C Wolff Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Johanna N H Timmer-Bonte; Eddy M M Adang; Hans J M Smit; Bonne Biesma; Frank A Wilschut; Gerben P Bootsma; Theo M de Boo; Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-05-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: P Thomas; O Castelnau; D Paillotin; H Léna; G Robinet; J F Muir; P Delaval; S Gouva; P Balmes; F Blanchon; D Perdu; R Poirier; P Pommier De Santi; C Penot-Ragon; J P Kleisbauer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nina Lathia; Nicole Mittmann; Carlo DeAngelis; Sandra Knowles; Matthew Cheung; Eugenia Piliotis; Neil Shear; Scott Walker Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Joan H Schiller; David Harrington; Chandra P Belani; Corey Langer; Alan Sandler; James Krook; Junming Zhu; David H Johnson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-01-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C J Langer; J C Leighton; R L Comis; P J O'Dwyer; C A McAleer; C A Bonjo; P F Engstrom; S Litwin; R F Ozols Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1995-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Erin E Kent; Sandra A Mitchell; Kathleen M Castro; Darren A DeWalt; Arnold D Kaluzny; Judith A Hautala; Oren Grad; Rachel M Ballard; Worta J McCaskill-Stevens; Barnett S Kramer; Steven B Clauser Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ching-Yu Wang; Coy D Heldermon; Scott M Vouri; Haesuk Park; Sarah E Wheeler; Brian Hemendra Ramnaraign; Nam Hoang Dang; Joshua D Brown Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-11-01