CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » NEWS

Oncology NEWS International. Vol. 4 No. 7
Pages: 1  2  3  4  
Next
 

Decision Model Analysis Shows Cost Impact of Growth Factors

July 1, 1995

LONG BEACH, Calif--There is no controversy in medical oncology that G-CSF decreases the risk of infection associated with neutropenia in patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy. But does it save money? To answer that question, John Glaspy, MD, MPH, and his colleagues at UCLA School of Medicine used a decision analysis model to determine the economic impact of G-CSF given as supportive care.

The economic study was based on data from the licensing trial for G-CSF (filgrastim, Neupogen). This trial involved patients with small-cell lung cancer who were randomized to receive the same chemotherapy regimen with either placebo or G-CSF, with the incidence of febrile neutropenia as the end point.

$2,302 Per Patient Per Cycle

The researchers collected hospital bills from patients in the study at three sites--UCLA, Duke, and Pittsburgh. To calculate drug cost, the mean duration of G-CSF therapy was multiplied by the average wholesale price of the agent at that time, weighted for the size of the patient, since G-CSF is prescribed on a per kilogram basis.

"We added on some extra money for the cost of doing the extra blood counts and of buying the needles and syringes, and came up with a proposed cost for G-CSF therapy of $2,302 per patient per cycle of chemotherapy administered," Dr. Glaspy said at the 1995 Quality of Life symposium sponsored by St. Mary Medical Center, Cancer Care Center.

To determine the cost of an episode of febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization, the researchers relied on the Medicare database, which showed that nationally, these patients stay in the hospital about 8 days, with hospital charges of around $1,000 a day, for a total of about $8,000.

The G-CSF patients had fewer hospitalizations on the first cycle than did the placebo group, and in addition, those admissions that did occur lasted about half as long, resulting in about a 50% reduction in hospital charges.

Pages: 1  2  3  4  
Next
 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.






 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Key Differences between FQHCs and RHCs
Chastity Werner, RHIT, June 13, 2013
FQHCs and RHCs take up a unique niche among physician practices. And that affects compensation and billing.
Improving Care Coordination in Your Practice
Susanne Madden,  June 12, 2013
Practices are feverishly working to control the rising costs of healthcare - effective care coordination can help.
Refunding Overpayments: Two Options for Medical Practices
Ericka L. Adler,  June 12, 2013
Medicare and Medicaid providers must return overpayments once identified. Here are two different refund approaches for practices to consider when necessary.
Four Easy Ways to Boost Patient Time of Service Collections
Aubrey Westgate,  June 12, 2013
Simple ways your medical practice staff can increase the likelihood patients will pay when presenting for appointments.
iPad Alternatives for Mobile Physicians
Marisa Torrieri, June 11, 2013
As more physicians are seeing the merits of media tablets, the market is expanding, too.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Soluble HER2 Levels Prognostic Factor in HER2+ Breast Cancer
  • ASCO: PD-L1 Antibody Elicits Durable Response in RCC
  • RECORD-3: Sunitinib Still Standard First-Line Treatment in Metastatic RCC
  • ASCO: Dabrafenib Shows Activity in BRAF-Mutated NSCLC Patients
  • Preventing Burnout in Oncology
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter


CancerNetwork on Facebook


CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy