Treatment Patterns Among Patients With Mantle Cell Lymphoma and Comparison of Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs Among Relapsed/Refractory Patients Treated With Ibrutinib or Chemoimmunotherapy: A Real-world Retrospective Study

Abstract

Purpose: This study assessed treatment patterns in patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and compared health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs of ibrutinib with or without rituximab (I ± R) versus chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL.Methods: For this retrospective cohort study, adults with MCL observed between May 13, 2013, and June 30, 2019, were identified using Optum's de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart Database. Treatment patterns were described among patients who received ≥1 line of therapy (LOT). HRU and costs (payer's perspective) were compared between patients treated with I ± R and CIT in the second or later line (2L + ) of therapy. To account for differences in baseline characteristics between the 2 cohorts, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used. Monthly HRU and costs starting from I ± R or CIT treatment initiation (index date) were compared during the first Oncology Care Model (OCM) episode (ie, first 6 months) postindex and during the observed duration of I ± R or CIT LOT (index LOT) using rate ratios (RRs) and mean monthly cost differences (MMCDs), respectively.Findings: Among 1346 patients with ≥1 LOT (median follow-up, 15.3 months), 870 (64.6%) were treated with CIT in the first line. Only 348 (25.9%) had a 2L of therapy, of whom 110 (31.6%) were treated with CIT and 98 (28.2%) with an ibrutinibbased therapy. A total of 300 patients were included for the comparison of HRU and costs between 2L +

Outcomes for Recurrent Mantle Cell Lymphoma Post-Ibrutinib Therapy: A Retrospective Cohort Study from a Japanese Administrative Database

“…This observation may be explained by off-label use or misclassification of LOT caused by limitations of the database that cannot track beyond a single hospital. The proportion of patients who underwent ASCT was 9.2%, which was similar to previous findings which utilized the MDV database in Japan (8.5%) and the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database in the USA (6.9–7.3%) [ 26 , 35 ]. However, other studies from the UK and Norway reported higher rates of ASCT of 24% [ 36 , 37 ].…”