Economic Analysis on Adoption of Biosimilar Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors in Patients With Nonmyeloid Cancer at Risk of Febrile Neutropenia Within the Oncology Care Model Framework
Affiliation
University of Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona College of PharmacyIssue Date
2021
Metadata
Show full item recordPublisher
American Society of Clinical OncologyCitation
Wang, W., Li, E., Campbell, K., McBride, A., & D’Amato, S. (2021). Economic Analysis on Adoption of Biosimilar Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factors in Patients With Nonmyeloid Cancer at Risk of Febrile Neutropenia Within the Oncology Care Model Framework. JCO Oncology Practice, 17(8), e1139–e1149.Journal
JCO oncology practiceRights
Copyright © 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 License.Collection Information
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.Abstract
PURPOSE: Value-based programs, such as the Oncology Care Model (OCM), seek to improve care for patients undergoing chemotherapy, while reducing total costs. The purpose of this study is to quantify the impact of adopting biosimilar granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) for febrile neutropenia (FN) primary prophylaxis (PP) from a US practice perspective. METHODS: A 1-year economic analysis on real-world direct drug costs and health care resource utilization was conducted in a hypothetical cohort of 500 patients with nonmyeloid cancer receiving chemotherapy. The first model simulated total cost savings of biosimilar versus reference G-CSFs over six cycles of chemotherapy. The second model evaluated cost and outcome implications of expanding the use of biosimilar G-CSFs to an additional 10% of patients at intermediate FN risk. RESULTS: Based on real-world evidence over 1 year, a total of 121 of 500 patients received G-CSF prophylaxis resulting in cost savings that ranged from $0.54M US dollars (USD) (short-acting, eg, filgrastim) to $1.68M USD (long-acting, eg, pegfilgrastim) when switching from reference to biosimilar G-CSFs. Expanding the use of biosimilar G-CSFs allowed an additional 24 patients to receive prophylaxis of FN, leading to cost savings of $0.03M USD or $1.19M USD, with a reduction of $0.08M USD in FN-related resource utilization cost. The per-patient per-year cost saving for long-acting G-CSFs was about $3,000 USD. CONCLUSION: The implementation of biosimilar versus reference G-CSFs to OCM-participating practices results in a reduction of costs and facilitates achieving OCM metrics by improving patients' outcomes while expanding biosimilar G-CSFs access to patients at intermediate risk of chemotherapy-induced FN.Note
Open access articleISSN
2688-1535PubMed ID
33961490Version
Final published versionae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1200/OP.20.00994
Scopus Count
Collections
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright © 2021 American Society of Clinical Oncology. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives 4.0 License.

