Monocentric Analysis of the Effectiveness and Financial Consequences of the Use of Lenograstim Versus Filgrastim for Mobilization of Peripheral Blood Progenitor Cells in Patients With Lymphoma and Myeloma Receiving Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Purpose: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are widely used to mobilize CD34+ stem cells and to support the engraftment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). A budget impact analysis and an incremental cost-effectiveness study of two G-CSFs (Lenograstim and Filgrastim biosimilar), considering engraftment, number of hospitalization days and number of G-CSF vials administered were performed. Patients and methods: Between 2009 and 2016, 248 patients undergoing autologous HSCT have been evaluated and divided into three groups (100 Leno-Leno, 93 Leno-Fil, 55 Fil-Fil) according to the type of G-CSF used for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and hematopoietic stem cell recovery after transplant. Results: The following statistically significant differences have been observed between Leno-Leno, Leno-Fil, Fil-Fil groups: a higher number of harvested CD34+ cells (10.56 vs 8.00 vs 7.20; p=0.0003) and a lower number of G-CSF vials (8 vs 8 vs 9; p=0.00020) used for full bone marrow recovery favoring Lenograstim. No statistically significant differences were found regarding the number of G-CSF vials used for mobilization, apheresis number and CD34+ cell peak. The post-transplant hematological recovery was faster in Lenograstim group than Filgrastim group: median time to neutrophil count engraftment (>500/mmc) was 12 vs 13 days; median time for platelets recovery (>20.000/mmc) was 12 vs 15 days (p=0.0001). The use of Lenograstim achieved cost savings of \u20ac566/patient over Filgrastim biosimilar, related to a decreased number of days of hospitalization (16 vs 17 days; p=0.00012), a lower overall incidence of adverse events, laboratory tests, transfusions for platelet recovery following discharge. Conclusion: In our experience, Lenograstim outperforms Filgrastim in terms of effectiveness and lower cost. This study shows a clinical superiority of Lenograstim over Filgrastim suggesting a potential cost savings favoring Lenograstim

Monocentric analysis of the effectiveness and financial consequences of the use of lenograstim versus filgrastim for mobilization of peripheral blood progenitor cells in patients with lymphoma and myeloma receiving chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation

Purpose: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are widely used to mobilize CD34+ stem cells and to support the engraftment after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). A budget impact analysis and an incremental cost-effectiveness study of two G-CSFs (Lenograstim and Filgrastim biosimilar), considering engraftment, number of hospitalization days and number of G-CSF vials administered were performed. Patients and Methods: Between 2009 and 2016, 248 patients undergoing autologous HSCT have been evaluated and divided into three groups (100 Leno-Leno, 93 Leno-Fil, 55 Fil-Fil) according to the type of G-CSF used for hematopoietic stem cell mobilization and hematopoietic stem cell recovery after transplant. Results: The following statistically significant differences have been observed between Leno-Leno, Leno-Fil, Fil-Fil groups: a higher number of harvested CD34+ cells (10.56 vs 8.00 vs 7.20; p=0.0003) and a lower number of G-CSF vials (8 vs 8 vs 9; p=0.00020) used for full bone marrow recovery favoring Lenograstim. No statistically significant differences were found regarding the number of G-CSF vials used for mobilization, apheresis number and CD34+ cell peak. The post-transplant hematological recovery was faster in Lenograstim group than Filgrastim group: median time to neutrophil count engraftment (> 500/mmc) was 12 vs 13 days; median time for platelets recovery (> 20.000/mmc) was 12 vs 15 days (p=0.0001). The use of Lenograstim achieved cost savings of € 566/patient over Filgrastim biosimilar, related to a decreased number of days of hospitalization (16 vs 17 days; p=0.00012), a lower overall incidence of adverse events, laboratory tests, transfusions for platelet recovery following discharge. Conclusion: In our experience, Lenograstim outperforms Filgrastim in terms of effectiveness and lower cost. This study shows a clinical superiority of Lenograstim over Filgrastim suggesting a potential cost savings favoring Lenograstim

A prospective study of direct medical costs in a large cohort of consecutively enrolled patients with refractory epilepsy in Italy

Objective To evaluate direct medical costs and their predictors in patients with refractory epilepsy enrolled into the SOPHIE study (Study of Outcomes of PHarmacoresistance In Epilepsy) in Italy. Methods Adults and children with refractory epilepsy were enrolled consecutively at 11 tertiary referral centers and followed for 18 months. At entry, all subjects underwent a structured interview and a medical examination, and were asked to keep records of diagnostic examinations, laboratory tests, specialist consultations, treatments, hospital admissions, and day-hospital days during follow-up. Study visits included assessments every 6 months of seizure frequency, health-related quality of life (Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory 31), medication-related adverse events (Adverse Event Profile) and mood state (Beck Depression Inventory-II). Cost items were priced by applying Italian tariffs. Cost estimates were adjusted to 2013 values. Results Of 1,124 enrolled individuals, 1,040 completed follow-up. Average annual cost per patient was \ue2\u82\uac 4,677. The highest cost was for antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment (50%), followed by hospital admissions (29% of overall costs). AED polytherapy, seizure frequency during follow-up, grade III pharmacoresistance, medical and psychiatric comorbidities, and occurrence of status epilepticus during follow-up were identified as significant predictors of higher costs. Age between 6 and 11 years, and genetic (idiopathic) generalized epilepsies were associated with the lowest costs. Costs showed prominent variation across centers, largely due to differences in the clinical characteristics of cohorts enrolled at each center and the prescribing of second-generation AEDs. Individual outliers associated with high costs related to hospital admissions had a major influence on costs in many centers. Significance Refractory epilepsy is associated with high costs that affect individuals and society. Costs differ across centers in relation to the characteristics of patients and the extent of use of more expensive, second-generation AEDs. Epilepsy-specific costs cannot be easily differentiated from costs related to comorbidities