Comparison of hospitalization risk and associated costs among patients receiving sargramostim, filgrastim, and pegfilgrastim for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia
- PMID: 19637341
- DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24535
Comparison of hospitalization risk and associated costs among patients receiving sargramostim, filgrastim, and pegfilgrastim for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia
Abstract
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.
Comment in
-
Comparison of hospitalization risk and associated costs among patients receiving sargramostim, filgrastim, and pegfilgrastim for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.Cancer. 2010 Jun 15;116(12):3073; author reply 3073-4. doi: 10.1002/cncr.25239. Cancer. 2010. PMID: 20564415 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Comparative effectiveness of filgrastim, pegfilgrastim, and sargramostim as prophylaxis against hospitalization for neutropenic complications in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy.Am J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jun;35(3):267-74. doi: 10.1097/COC.0b013e31820dc075. Am J Clin Oncol. 2012. PMID: 21378538
-
Retrospective comparison of neutropenia in children with Ewing sarcoma treated with chemotherapy and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) or pegylated G-CSF.Clin Ther. 2009;31 Pt 2:2388-95. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.11.013. Clin Ther. 2009. PMID: 20110048
-
Mobilization of peripheral blood stem cells following myelosuppressive chemotherapy: a randomized comparison of filgrastim, sargramostim, or sequential sargramostim and filgrastim.Bone Marrow Transplant. 2001 May;27 Suppl 2:S23-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1702865. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2001. PMID: 11436117 Clinical Trial.
-
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use in patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: clinical and economic benefits.Oncology (Williston Park). 2006 Apr;20(5 Suppl 4):16-21. Oncology (Williston Park). 2006. PMID: 16736984 Review.
-
Granulocyte growth factors in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006 Jun;58(3):221-30. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2005.09.002. Epub 2006 May 11. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2006. PMID: 16697211 Review.
Cited by
-
Colony-stimulating factors detected in tumor cells and voided urine are potential prognostic markers for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy.Res Rep Urol. 2018 Sep 21;10:103-111. doi: 10.2147/RRU.S166497. eCollection 2018. Res Rep Urol. 2018. PMID: 30288389 Free PMC article.
-
Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) patterns of use in cancer patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy.Support Care Cancer. 2014 Jun;22(6):1619-28. doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2121-7. Epub 2014 Feb 4. Support Care Cancer. 2014. PMID: 24492928
-
Granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor in 66 patients with myeloid or lymphoid neoplasms and recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation with invasive fungal disease.Acta Haematol. 2013;129(1):26-34. doi: 10.1159/000342121. Epub 2012 Oct 2. Acta Haematol. 2013. PMID: 23038157 Free PMC article.
-
Risk of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with early discontinuation of pegfilgrastim prophylaxis in US clinical practice.Support Care Cancer. 2016 Jun;24(6):2481-90. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-3039-4. Epub 2015 Dec 15. Support Care Cancer. 2016. PMID: 26670915 Free PMC article.
-
Technical evaluation of methods for identifying chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in healthcare claims databases.BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Feb 13;13:60. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-60. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013. PMID: 23406481 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources