Economic analysis of the clinical uses of the colony-stimulating factors

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Colony-stimulating factors can reduce the morbidity and possibly the mortality from some types of cancer treatment. Reductions in hospitalization and supportive care, eg, transfusion requirements and antibiotics, have been documented in several clinical trials and can lead to lower total care costs. However, the high cost of colony-stimulating factors and the necessity to treat large numbers of patients who do not benefit can offset the economic gains, unless the savings in hospitalization and supportive care are substantial. Primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors is cost- saving only if the rate of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia is 40% or more; no current standard regimens are near that figure. In general, the American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines for the use of colony-stimulating factors lead to effective and cost-conscious use of these expensive growth factors. Colony-stimulating factors are not recommended for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia, are recommended for secondary prophylaxis if dose-reduction is not appropriate, and are recommended for stimulation of hematopoietic progenitor cells and reconstitution after high-dose chemotherapy. Further expansion of use based on economic factors will depend on documented survival benefit, major improvements in supportive care due to colony-stimulating factors, or markedly lower costs of colony-stimulating factors.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)175-179
Number of pages5
JournalCurrent Opinion in Hematology
Volume3
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1996
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Colony-Stimulating Factors
Economics
Costs and Cost Analysis
Febrile Neutropenia
Hospitalization
Hematopoietic Stem Cells
Practice Guidelines
General Practice
Intercellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins
Clinical Trials
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Morbidity
Drug Therapy
Survival
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hematology

Cite this

Economic analysis of the clinical uses of the colony-stimulating factors. / Smith, Thomas J.

In: Current Opinion in Hematology, Vol. 3, No. 3, 1996, p. 175-179.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0f2ef612d0064715aac08f5cea36311b,
title = "Economic analysis of the clinical uses of the colony-stimulating factors",
abstract = "Colony-stimulating factors can reduce the morbidity and possibly the mortality from some types of cancer treatment. Reductions in hospitalization and supportive care, eg, transfusion requirements and antibiotics, have been documented in several clinical trials and can lead to lower total care costs. However, the high cost of colony-stimulating factors and the necessity to treat large numbers of patients who do not benefit can offset the economic gains, unless the savings in hospitalization and supportive care are substantial. Primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors is cost- saving only if the rate of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia is 40{\%} or more; no current standard regimens are near that figure. In general, the American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines for the use of colony-stimulating factors lead to effective and cost-conscious use of these expensive growth factors. Colony-stimulating factors are not recommended for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia, are recommended for secondary prophylaxis if dose-reduction is not appropriate, and are recommended for stimulation of hematopoietic progenitor cells and reconstitution after high-dose chemotherapy. Further expansion of use based on economic factors will depend on documented survival benefit, major improvements in supportive care due to colony-stimulating factors, or markedly lower costs of colony-stimulating factors.",
author = "Smith, {Thomas J}",
year = "1996",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "175--179",
journal = "Current Opinion in Hematology",
issn = "1065-6251",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Economic analysis of the clinical uses of the colony-stimulating factors

AU - Smith, Thomas J

PY - 1996

Y1 - 1996

N2 - Colony-stimulating factors can reduce the morbidity and possibly the mortality from some types of cancer treatment. Reductions in hospitalization and supportive care, eg, transfusion requirements and antibiotics, have been documented in several clinical trials and can lead to lower total care costs. However, the high cost of colony-stimulating factors and the necessity to treat large numbers of patients who do not benefit can offset the economic gains, unless the savings in hospitalization and supportive care are substantial. Primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors is cost- saving only if the rate of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia is 40% or more; no current standard regimens are near that figure. In general, the American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines for the use of colony-stimulating factors lead to effective and cost-conscious use of these expensive growth factors. Colony-stimulating factors are not recommended for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia, are recommended for secondary prophylaxis if dose-reduction is not appropriate, and are recommended for stimulation of hematopoietic progenitor cells and reconstitution after high-dose chemotherapy. Further expansion of use based on economic factors will depend on documented survival benefit, major improvements in supportive care due to colony-stimulating factors, or markedly lower costs of colony-stimulating factors.

AB - Colony-stimulating factors can reduce the morbidity and possibly the mortality from some types of cancer treatment. Reductions in hospitalization and supportive care, eg, transfusion requirements and antibiotics, have been documented in several clinical trials and can lead to lower total care costs. However, the high cost of colony-stimulating factors and the necessity to treat large numbers of patients who do not benefit can offset the economic gains, unless the savings in hospitalization and supportive care are substantial. Primary prophylaxis with colony-stimulating factors is cost- saving only if the rate of hospitalization for febrile neutropenia is 40% or more; no current standard regimens are near that figure. In general, the American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guidelines for the use of colony-stimulating factors lead to effective and cost-conscious use of these expensive growth factors. Colony-stimulating factors are not recommended for primary prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia, are recommended for secondary prophylaxis if dose-reduction is not appropriate, and are recommended for stimulation of hematopoietic progenitor cells and reconstitution after high-dose chemotherapy. Further expansion of use based on economic factors will depend on documented survival benefit, major improvements in supportive care due to colony-stimulating factors, or markedly lower costs of colony-stimulating factors.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0029901901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0029901901&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9372072

AN - SCOPUS:0029901901

VL - 3

SP - 175

EP - 179

JO - Current Opinion in Hematology

JF - Current Opinion in Hematology

SN - 1065-6251

IS - 3

ER -