Pegfilgrastim Versus Filgrastim for Primary Prophylaxis of Febrile Neutropenia in Patients with non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Study

AIM: One method to deal with febrile neutropenia is the use of granulocyte colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs). Pegfilgrastim or Filgrastim injection can lead to a reduction in febrile neutropenia and severe neutropenia in patients receiving chemotherapy. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of using Pegfilgrastim, 3-day Filgrastim and 1-day Filgrastim medication strategies for the primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in patients with relapsed non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after salvage chemotherapy who referred to two referral centers affiliated to Iran, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in 2014. METHOD: This cost-effectiveness study was conducted on 131 patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. The outcome of the study was the prevention of febrile neutropenia. The cost data were collected from the health payer’s perspective for each medication strategy by reviewing the patients’ medical records and using expert opinion. The results were presented in terms of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the sensitivity analysis was used to assess the robustness of results. In this study, the collected data were analyzed using Excel 2007 and Tree-age 2011. RESULTS: The results showed that the degrees of febrile neutropenia prevented by Pegfilgrastim, 3-day Filgrastim and 1-day Filgrastim strategies were 0.97, 0.95 and 0.83, respectively, and the average annual costs of hospitalization per patient were, 5299, 4959 and 5808 PPP$. CONCLUSION: The results showed that while 1-day Filgrastim was absolutely predominant, using the 3-day Filgrastim and Pegfilgrastim strategies were more cost-effective. Therefore, they can be recommended respectively as the first and second treatment priorities in patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after salvage chemotherapy.