D A Stewart1, J S Boudreault2, B Maturi3, D Boras3, R Foley4. 1. Tom Baker Cancer Centre and University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. 2. Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Montreal, QC. 3. Hoffmann-La Roche Limited, Mississauga, ON. 4. Juravinski Hospital and Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON.
Abstract
Background: Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (nhl) is the most common hematologic malignancy. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (dlbcl) and follicular lymphoma (fl) constitute 55% of new nhl cases and are initially treated with rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy. Relative to intravenous (IV) rituximab, a subcutaneous (sc) formulation approved in 2016 has comparable pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety, and a greatly reduced administration time; it is also preferred by patients. The objective of the present study was to estimate the effect (on systemic therapy suite time and on the costs of drug acquisition and administration) of implementing sc rituximab in the initial chemoimmunotherapy for fl and dlbcl over 3 years in the Canadian market. Methods: An Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, U.S.A.)-based model was created with a population size based on epidemiologic data and current rituximab use, duration of use considering initial therapy, time savings for sc rituximab administration from published studies, costs from standard Canadian sources, and assumed uptake in implementing provinces of 65%, 75%, and 80% over 3 years. Key parameters and sensitivity analysis values were validated by clinical experts located in various Canadian jurisdictions. Costs are reported in 2017 Canadian dollars from the perspective of the health care system. Results: More than 3 years after implementation of sc rituximab, we estimated that 5762 Canadians would be receiving sc rituximab, resulting in savings of 128,715 hours in systemic therapy suite time and approximately $40 million in drug and administration costs. Sensitivity analyses suggest that the model is most sensitive to sc market uptake, number of induction therapy cycles, and eligible patients. Conclusions: Subcutaneous administration of rituximab can significantly reduce systemic therapy suite time and achieve substantial savings in drug and administration costs.
Background: Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (nhl) is the most common hematologic malignancy. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (dlbcl) and follicular lymphoma (fl) constitute 55% of new nhl cases and are initially treated with rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy. Relative to intravenous (IV) rituximab, a subcutaneous (sc) formulation approved in 2016 has comparable pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety, and a greatly reduced administration time; it is also preferred by patients. The objective of the present study was to estimate the effect (on systemic therapy suite time and on the costs of drug acquisition and administration) of implementing sc rituximab in the initial chemoimmunotherapy for fl and dlbcl over 3 years in the Canadian market. Methods: An Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, U.S.A.)-based model was created with a population size based on epidemiologic data and current rituximab use, duration of use considering initial therapy, time savings for sc rituximab administration from published studies, costs from standard Canadian sources, and assumed uptake in implementing provinces of 65%, 75%, and 80% over 3 years. Key parameters and sensitivity analysis values were validated by clinical experts located in various Canadian jurisdictions. Costs are reported in 2017 Canadian dollars from the perspective of the health care system. Results: More than 3 years after implementation of sc rituximab, we estimated that 5762 Canadians would be receiving sc rituximab, resulting in savings of 128,715 hours in systemic therapy suite time and approximately $40 million in drug and administration costs. Sensitivity analyses suggest that the model is most sensitive to sc market uptake, number of induction therapy cycles, and eligible patients. Conclusions: Subcutaneous administration of rituximab can significantly reduce systemic therapy suite time and achieve substantial savings in drug and administration costs.
Authors: Wolfgang Hiddemann; Michael Kneba; Martin Dreyling; Norbert Schmitz; Eva Lengfelder; Rudolf Schmits; Marcel Reiser; Bernd Metzner; Harriet Harder; Susanna Hegewisch-Becker; Thomas Fischer; Martin Kropff; Hans-Edgar Reis; Mathias Freund; Bernhard Wörmann; Roland Fuchs; Manfred Planker; Jörg Schimke; Hartmut Eimermacher; Lorenz Trümper; Ali Aldaoud; Reza Parwaresch; Michael Unterhalt Journal: Blood Date: 2005-08-25 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Andrew Davies; Francesco Merli; Biljana Mihaljević; Santiago Mercadal; Noppadol Siritanaratkul; Philippe Solal-Céligny; Axel Boehnke; Claude Berge; Magali Genevray; Artem Zharkov; Mark Dixon; Michael Brewster; Martin Barrett; David MacDonald Journal: Lancet Haematol Date: 2017-05-02 Impact factor: 18.959
Authors: M Rummel; T M Kim; F Aversa; W Brugger; E Capochiani; C Plenteda; F Re; P Trask; S Osborne; R Smith; A Grigg Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2017-04-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Pieternella Lugtenburg; Irit Avivi; Henriette Berenschot; Osman Ilhan; Jean Pierre Marolleau; Arnon Nagler; Antonio Rueda; Monica Tani; Mehmet Turgut; Stuart Osborne; Rodney Smith; Michael Pfreundschuh Journal: Haematologica Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Michael J Harvey; Yi Zhong; Eric Morris; Jacob N Beverage; Robert S Epstein; Anita J Chawla Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-01-24 Impact factor: 3.240