Changes in income and employment after diagnosis among patients with multiple myeloma in The Netherlands

Objective: Due to new treatment options, survival rates in multiple myeloma (MM) are improving. Consequently, maintaining work and income is becoming more important for patients and society. Therefore, we aimed to explore the change in income and employment in patients with MM. Methods: Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry of MM patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2017 were merged with socioeconomic data from Statistics Netherlands. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse total income, income from employment, and accumulated income before and after diagnosis. Results: Income from employment decreased by 45% in MM patients, between 1 year before and 4 years after diagnosis Four years after diagnosis, 35% of the patients were still employed, with an accumulated 5-year productivity loss of €121 million. Higher income loss from employment and job loss was observed in female patients, patients with more extensive disease, or those not treated with autologous stem cell transplant.Conclusion: Loss of (income from) employment among patients with MM was high, causing financial burden on the patient and society. With improving survival in MM, more research and awareness are needed to better assess the importance of income and work for MM patients and society.</p

Changes in income and employment after diagnosis among patients with multiple myeloma in The Netherlands

Objective: Due to new treatment options, survival rates in multiple myeloma (MM) are improving. Consequently, maintaining work and income is becoming more important for patients and society. Therefore, we aimed to explore the change in income and employment in patients with MM. Methods: Data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry of MM patients diagnosed between 2012 and 2017 were merged with socioeconomic data from Statistics Netherlands. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse total income, income from employment, and accumulated income before and after diagnosis. Results: Income from employment decreased by 45% in MM patients, between 1 year before and 4 years after diagnosis Four years after diagnosis, 35% of the patients were still employed, with an accumulated 5-year productivity loss of €121 million. Higher income loss from employment and job loss was observed in female patients, patients with more extensive disease, or those not treated with autologous stem cell transplant.Conclusion: Loss of (income from) employment among patients with MM was high, causing financial burden on the patient and society. With improving survival in MM, more research and awareness are needed to better assess the importance of income and work for MM patients and society.</p

High hospital-related burden of treatment for multiple myeloma patients: outcomes of a feasibility study using reimbursement data from electronic health records

Objective: Multiple Myeloma (MM) is an incurable plasma cell malignancy with intensive and prolonged treatment, presumably causing a considerable burden of treatment on patients. The concept of treatment burden is defined as the work of being a patient and its impact on well-being. However, there is no consistent definition and method to measure treatment burden in patients with MM. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the burden of treatment in MM patients and to compare it to Chronic Lymphoid Leukaemia (CLL). Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis using reimbursement data from electronic health records (EHR) to calculate treatment burden. Treatment burden was defined as the number of hospital visits on unique days. After data clearance, data were analysed using descriptive statistics comparing treatment burden between different types of visits, age groups, years since diagnosis, and between MM and CLL patients. Results: Reimbursement data of 176 MM and 173 CLL patients were included in the analysis, which showed i) highest treatment burden in the first year immediately after diagnosis, ii) small differences between age groups (total visits year 0: 68.2 ≤ 65/63.8>65 years in MM and 21.7 ≤ 65/25.6>65 years in CLL), iii) higher treatment rates with more treatment burden in MM patients compared to CLL. Conclusion: EHR reimbursement data provided useful information to measure treatment burden and showed higher burden in MM patients compared to CLL patients. With improving survival, measuring burden of treatment in clinical practice in patients with MM contributes to decreasing treatment burden and more patient-centred care. Conclusion: EHR reimbursement data provided useful information to measure treatment burden and showed higher burden in MM patients compared to CLL patients. With improving survival, measuring burden of treatment in clinical practice in patients with MM contributes to decreasing treatment burden and more patient-centred care. Public interest summary: As in other malignant diseases, new treatment options dramatically improved survival in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). As a consequence, MM patients undergo intensive and intermittent periods of treatment, which causes a considerable burden of treatment. In this study we used data retrieved from Electronic Health Records (EHR) from 176 patients with MM and 173 patients with chronic lymphoid leukaemia (CLL) (both haematological diseases), to measure and analyse patients’ burden of undergoing treatment. The results showed that EHR-data provided useful information to determine treatment burden in patients and that treatment burden is considerably higher in patients with MM compared to CLL patients. Further development of this method makes it possible to frequently monitor and evaluate treatment burden. Eventually, this may help health care professionals to provide more patient-centred care and improve quality of life by reducing treatment burden

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of MammaPrint® to Guide the Use of Endocrine Therapy in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer

Background: Gene expression profiling tests can predict the risk of disease recurrence and select patients who are expected to benefit from therapy, while allowing other patients to forgo therapy. For breast cancers, these tests were initially designed to tailor chemotherapy decisions, but recent evidence suggests that they may also guide the use of endocrine therapy. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of a prognostic test, MammaPrint®, to guide the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients eligible according to Dutch treatment guidelines. Methods: We constructed a Markov decision model to calculate the lifetime costs (in 2020 Euros) and effects (survival and quality-adjusted life-years) of MammaPrint® testing versus usual care (endocrine therapy for all patients) in a simulated cohort of patients. The population of interest includes patients for whom MammaPrint® testing is currently not indicated, but for whom it may be possible to safely omit endocrine therapy. We applied both a health care perspective and a societal perspective and discounted costs (4%) and effects (1.5%). Model inputs were obtained from published research (including randomized controlled trials), nationwide cancer registry data, cohort data and publicly available data sources. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainty around input parameters. Additionally, threshold analyses were performed to identify under which circumstances MammaPrint® testing would be cost effective. Results: Adjuvant endocrine therapy guided by MammaPrint® resulted in fewer side effects, more (quality-adjusted) life-years (0.10 and 0.07 incremental QALYS and LYs, respectively) and higher costs (€18,323 incremental costs) compared with the usual care strategy in which all patients receive endocrine therapy. While costs for hospital visits, medication costs and productivity costs were somewhat higher in the usual care strategy, these did not outweigh costs of testing in the MammaPrint® strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €185,644 per QALY gained from a healthcare perspective and €180,617 from a societal perspective. Sensitivity and scenario analyses showed that the conclusions remained the same under changed input parameters and assumptions. Our results show that MammaPrint® can become a cost-effective strategy when either the price of the test is reduced (> 50%), or the proportion of patients for which treatment is altered (i.e. those with ultra-low risk) increases to > 26%. Conclusion: Standard MammaPrint® testing to guide the use of endocrine therapy in our simulated patient population appears not to be a cost-effective strategy compared with usual care. The cost effectiveness of the test can be improved by reducing the price or preselecting a population more likely to benefit from the test

Costs of Newly Funded Proton Therapy Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing in The Netherlands

Background: Proton therapy (PT) has characteristics that enable the sparing of healthy, non-cancerous tissue surrounding the radiotherapy target volume better from radiation doses than conventional radiotherapy for patients with cancer. While this innovation entails investment costs, the information about the treatment costs per patient, especially during the start-up phase, is limited. This study aims to calculate the costs of PT at a single center during the start-up phase in the Netherlands. Methods: The cost of PT per patient was estimated for the treatment indications, head and neck cancer, breast cancer, brain cancer, thorax cancer, chordoma and eye melanoma. A time-driven activity-based costing analysis (TDABC), a methodology that calculates the costs of consumed healthcare resources by a patient, was conducted in a newly established PT center in the Netherlands (HPTC). Both direct (e.g., the human resource costs for medical staff) and indirect costs (e.g., the operating/interest costs, indirect human resource costs and depreciation costs) were included. A scenario analysis was conducted for short-term (2021), middle-term (till 2024) and long-term (after 2024) predicted patient numbers in the PT center. Results: The total cost of PT in 2020 at the center varied between EUR 12,062 for an eye melanoma course and EUR 89,716 for a head and neck course. Overall, indirect costs were the largest cost component. The high indirect costs implied the potential of the scale of economics; according to our estimation, the treatment cost could be reduced to 35% of the current cost when maximum treatment capacity is achieved. Conclusion: This study estimated the PT cost delivered in a newly operated treatment center. Scenario analysis for increased patient numbers revealed the potential for cost reductions. Nevertheless, to have an estimation that reflects the matured cost of PT which could be used in cost-effectiveness analysis, a follow-up study assessing the full-fledged situation is recommended

A systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of novel agents in the treatment of multiple myeloma

Background: Novel therapies for multiple myeloma (MM) promise to improve outcomes but are also associated with substantial increasing costs. Evidence regarding cost-effectiveness of novel treatments is necessary, but a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the cost-effectiveness evidence of novel treatments is currently lacking. Methods: We searched Embase, Medline via Ovid, Web of Science and EconLIT ProQuest to identify all cost-effectiveness evaluations of novel pharmacological treatment of MM reporting cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and cost per life year (LY) gained since 2005. Quality and completeness of reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. Results: We identified 13 economic evaluations, comprising 32 comparisons. Our results show that novel agents generate additional LYs (range: 0.311–3.85) and QALYs (range: 0.1–2.85) compared to backbone regimens and 0.02 to 1.10 LYs and 0.01 to 0.91 QALYs for comparisons between regimens containing two novel agents. Lifetime healthcare costs ranged from USD 60,413 to 1,434,937 per patient. The cost-effectiveness ratios per QALY gained ranged from dominating to USD 1,369,062 for novel agents compared with backbone therapies and from dominating to USD 618,018 for comparisons between novel agents. Conclusions: Cost-effectiveness ratios of novel agents were generally above current willingness-to-pay thresholds. To ensure access, cost-effectiveness should be improved or cost-effectiveness ratios above current thresholds should be accepted

Assessment of Studies Evaluating Incremental Costs, Effectiveness, or Cost-Effectiveness of Systemic Therapies in Breast Cancer Based on Claims Data: A Systematic Review

Objectives: Large secondary databases, such as those containing insurance claims data, are increasingly being used to compare the effects and costs of treatments in routine clinical practice. Despite their appeal, however, caution must be exercised when using these data. In this study, we aimed to identify and assess the methodological quality of studies that used claims data to compare the effectiveness, costs, or cost-effectiveness of systemic therapies for breast cancer. Methods: We searched Embase, the Cochrane Library, Medline, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for English-language publications and assessed the methodological quality using the Good Research for Comparative Effectiveness principles. This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under number CRD42018103992. Results: We identified 1251 articles, of which 106 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in the United States (74%) and Taiwan (9%) and were based on claims data sets (35%) or claims data linked to cancer registries (58%). Furthermore, most included large samples (mean 17 130 patients) and elderly patients, and they covered various outcomes (eg, survival, adverse events, resource use, and costs). Key methodological shortcomings were the lack of information on relevant confounders, the risk of immortal time bias, and the lack of information on the validity of outcomes. Only a few studies performed sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Many comparative studies of cost, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness have been published in recent decades based on claims data, and the number of publications has increased over time. Despite the availability of guidelines to improve quality, methodological issues persist and are often inappropriately addressed or reported