Pcn72 Comparative Cost Analysis of Subcutaneous Trastuzumab Originator (Herceptin®) vs Intravenous Trastuzumab Biosimilar (Kanjinti) From a Hospital Perspective in Italy

D’Arpino, Alessandro; Savoia, Marcella; Cirillo, Luigi; Despiegel, Nicolas; Haffemayer, Benjamin; Giannopoulou, Andromachi; Gaikwad, I.

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2019.09.269

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, an Italian cost comparison considered not only drug costs, but also administration costs and costs related to consumables and pharmacist time over a 17cycle period from the hospital perspective [14]. Overall costs amounted to €8,499 per patient with intravenous biosimilar trastuzumab and €17,929 with subcutaneous reference trastuzumab.…”

Section: Trastuzumabmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do biosimilars sustain value, affordability, and access to oncology care?

Simoens

2020

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Trastuzumabmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do biosimilars sustain value, affordability, and access to oncology care?

Simoens

2020

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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

McCloskey¹,

Ortega²,

Nair³

et al. 2022

PharmacoEconomics Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 ...

show abstract