Comparative Cost-Effectiveness Of Plerixafor Plus Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor Versus Cyclophosphamide Plus Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating For Autologous Peripheral Blood Stem Cell Mobilization In Patients With Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Optimizing Autologous Stem Cell Mobilization Strategies to Improve Patient Outcomes: Consensus Guidelines and Recommendations

“…P þ G-CSF was associated with reduced resource utilization, more patients completing apheresis in 1 day, and fewer hospitalizations, transfusions, and G-CSF doses [134]. Other retrospective analyses have confirmed that upfront P þ G-CSF has similar or reduced costs compared with CM þ G-CSF, along with lower failures rates (6% to 12.5% versus 21% to 29%) [135,136].…”

“…Those Phase III trials assessed steady-state mobilization (P þ G-CSF versus placebo þ G-CSF), and did not include a prospective comparison of P þ G-CSF versus CM þ G-CSF. Nonetheless, the available nonrandomized data suggest that P þ G-CSF has similar or improved cell yields and failure rates and improved resource utilization compared with CM alone [134][135][136]. A retrospective comparison of patients participating in the expanded access protocol of P þ G-CSF with matched historical controls mobilized with CM þ G-CSF showed 100% successful mobilization in both cohorts with similar median total CD34 þ cells counts collected and similar mobilization costs in the 2 groups.…”

Outcome, toxicity profile and cost analysis of autologous stem cell mobilization

“…9 A recent study using a Monte Carlo simulations of 1000 cases suggested that P þ G may be more cost-effective than CY þ G for autologous SCM for most patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. 13 The outcomes reported in this study are based on observational data from a single institution, which may have limited generalizability to other practice settings. Another limitation of our study is that no direct Table 3 Clinical characteristics of patients with ideal outcome and non-ideal outcome comparison is made with other regimens in the analysis.…”

Pharmacoeconomics of Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization: An Overview of Current Evidence and Gaps in the Literature

“…For expensive novel therapies that may be more effective than the standard of care, it becomes necessary to determine if the superior effectiveness of the drug outweighs the increased cost. For these reasons, various analyses of plerixaforcontaining mobilization regimens have been performed to determine the effectiveness, net costs, and benefits of plerixafor use compared to standard mobilization regimens [18,21,62,63,[74][75][76][77][78].…”

“…Although mobilization techniques have not been shown to alter the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing aHSCT, available data suggest that effectiveness, QoL, and costs may differ significantly between strategies [18,19,21,24,62,63,68,[74][75][76][77][78]. Prospective studies assessing QoL and PE endpoints are warranted.…”