Cargando…

A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting

BACKGROUND: The introduction of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted treatment options, including dual HER2 blockade, has improved the prognosis for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) substantially. However, most of these treatments are administered via the intravenou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McCloskey, Conor, Ortega, María Toboso, Nair, Sunita, Garcia, Maria João, Manevy, Federico
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9395845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35996066
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-022-00361-3
_version_ 1784771792178511872
author McCloskey, Conor
Ortega, María Toboso
Nair, Sunita
Garcia, Maria João
Manevy, Federico
author_facet McCloskey, Conor
Ortega, María Toboso
Nair, Sunita
Garcia, Maria João
Manevy, Federico
author_sort McCloskey, Conor
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The introduction of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted treatment options, including dual HER2 blockade, has improved the prognosis for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) substantially. However, most of these treatments are administered via the intravenous (IV) route, which can present many challenges, such as long infusion and observation times, issues associated with repeated IV access, and increased strain on time and resources of medical centers and healthcare professionals. A fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous (SC) injection (pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf (PHESGO(®), F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; PH FDC SC)) has been approved for use alongside chemotherapy for early-stage and metastatic HER2-positive BC. OBJECTIVES: This systematic literature review was performed to identify evidence relating to time/resource use and resulting cost differences between SC and IV administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting, and, ultimately, to inform economic modeling and associated health technology assessment of PH FDC SC. METHODS: Electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and EconLit) were searched on 9 April 2020. Additional hand searches were performed to identify publications not captured in the electronic database search. Publication screening and data extraction (study characteristics, participants, interventions, costs, and time/resource use) were carried out per the standard Cochrane review methodology. The quality of economic evidence of cost analyses was assessed using the 36-item checklist of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Single Technology Appraisal Specification for submission of evidence (January 2015). RESULTS: The database search identified 2,740 records, of which 237 underwent full text screening. Full text screening, prioritization of publications about patients with a cancer diagnosis, and the addition of four citations identified during the hand search resulted in 72 final included publications, relating to 71 unique studies. This included 40 publications that described the time/resource use and/or costs associated with SC versus IV trastuzumab administration for the treatment of HER2-positive BC, and 28 publications that described time/resource use and/or costs associated with rituximab SC versus IV administration for the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma/follicular lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The majority of publications showed substantial time savings for preparation and administration of SC versus IV therapy, and cost savings associated with reductions in healthcare professional time and resource use for SC administration. LIMITATIONS: There was a lack of consensus between publications regarding time and cost measurements. In addition, the search was limited to publications related to anticancer drugs; the majority of the studies included were performed in European countries. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This review indicated a substantial body of evidence showing time/resource and cost savings of SC versus IV administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting, which can be used to inform economic evaluations of PH FDC SC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41669-022-00361-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9395845
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93958452022-08-23 A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting McCloskey, Conor Ortega, María Toboso Nair, Sunita Garcia, Maria João Manevy, Federico Pharmacoecon Open Systematic Review BACKGROUND: The introduction of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted treatment options, including dual HER2 blockade, has improved the prognosis for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) substantially. However, most of these treatments are administered via the intravenous (IV) route, which can present many challenges, such as long infusion and observation times, issues associated with repeated IV access, and increased strain on time and resources of medical centers and healthcare professionals. A fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous (SC) injection (pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf (PHESGO(®), F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; PH FDC SC)) has been approved for use alongside chemotherapy for early-stage and metastatic HER2-positive BC. OBJECTIVES: This systematic literature review was performed to identify evidence relating to time/resource use and resulting cost differences between SC and IV administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting, and, ultimately, to inform economic modeling and associated health technology assessment of PH FDC SC. METHODS: Electronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and EconLit) were searched on 9 April 2020. Additional hand searches were performed to identify publications not captured in the electronic database search. Publication screening and data extraction (study characteristics, participants, interventions, costs, and time/resource use) were carried out per the standard Cochrane review methodology. The quality of economic evidence of cost analyses was assessed using the 36-item checklist of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Single Technology Appraisal Specification for submission of evidence (January 2015). RESULTS: The database search identified 2,740 records, of which 237 underwent full text screening. Full text screening, prioritization of publications about patients with a cancer diagnosis, and the addition of four citations identified during the hand search resulted in 72 final included publications, relating to 71 unique studies. This included 40 publications that described the time/resource use and/or costs associated with SC versus IV trastuzumab administration for the treatment of HER2-positive BC, and 28 publications that described time/resource use and/or costs associated with rituximab SC versus IV administration for the treatment of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma/follicular lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The majority of publications showed substantial time savings for preparation and administration of SC versus IV therapy, and cost savings associated with reductions in healthcare professional time and resource use for SC administration. LIMITATIONS: There was a lack of consensus between publications regarding time and cost measurements. In addition, the search was limited to publications related to anticancer drugs; the majority of the studies included were performed in European countries. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This review indicated a substantial body of evidence showing time/resource and cost savings of SC versus IV administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting, which can be used to inform economic evaluations of PH FDC SC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41669-022-00361-3. Springer International Publishing 2022-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9395845/ /pubmed/35996066 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-022-00361-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Systematic Review
McCloskey, Conor
Ortega, María Toboso
Nair, Sunita
Garcia, Maria João
Manevy, Federico
A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting
title A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting
title_full A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting
title_fullStr A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting
title_full_unstemmed A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting
title_short A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting
title_sort systematic review of time and resource use costs of subcutaneous versus intravenous administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9395845/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35996066
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-022-00361-3
work_keys_str_mv AT mccloskeyconor asystematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT ortegamariatoboso asystematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT nairsunita asystematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT garciamariajoao asystematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT manevyfederico asystematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT mccloskeyconor systematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT ortegamariatoboso systematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT nairsunita systematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT garciamariajoao systematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting
AT manevyfederico systematicreviewoftimeandresourceusecostsofsubcutaneousversusintravenousadministrationofoncologybiologicsinahospitalsetting