The findings show that patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma who had continuous systemic treatment had average monthly emergency department costs that were $100 lower than those with interrupted treatment.
Results presented March 4, 2019, at the American Academy of Dermatology meeting show that continuing systemic treatment in cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) was associated with less time in the hospital and the emergency department (ED). Monthly ED costs were $100 higher, on average, for those who interrupted treatment.
The data were drawn from a retrospective analysis of claims data from 1081 patients with CTCL who were enrolled in their health plan 3 months before and 6 months after they began systemic treatment for their condition. Continuing systemic treatment was defined as staying with treatment for up to 180 days without a gap of 45 days or more. The claims covered the time frame of 2010 to 2015.
According to the Cutaneous Lymphoma Foundation, a systemic therapy refers to treatment that, once absorbed, reaches the bloodstream and is distributed throughout the body. A statement from Mallinckrodt, which supported the study, acknowledged that there are no recommended treatment durations for some systemic therapies. Mallinkrodt is the maker of extracorporeal photopheresis to treat CTCL.
The study found the following:
“This is one of the first studies of its kind to look at the potential resource and cost impact of continuation of systemic therapy for CTCL and demonstrates our commitment to provide data to support informed decision-making,” Tunde Otulana, MD, senior vice president and chief medical officer at Mallinckrodt, said in a statement. “It is an important addition to the body of knowledge on CTCL, as examining resource utilization and costs can lead to improvements in healthcare overall.”
In an email, a Mallinckrodt spokesperson said a clinician’s treatment decision in CTCL could be based on multiple factors. Because this type of information is not available in claims databases, the reasons for discontinuation of systemic treatment have not been well studied. It is unknown if treatment interruptions were due to financial toxicity.
Treatment duration is not addressed in guidelines by either the American Society of Clinical Oncology or the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, according to the company.
NCCN Guidelines Update Adds Momelotinib Below Ruxolitinib for High-, Low-Risk Myelofibrosis
November 21st 2023Momelotinib was given category 2A and 2B status for patients with high- and low-risk myelofibrosis (MF) and MF with anemia. However, ruxolitinib retains a higher category of recommendation as a treatment for patients with MF.
Read More
Oncology Onward: A Conversation With Dr Shereef Elnahal, Under Secretary for Health
April 20th 2023Shereef Elnahal, MD, MBA, under secretary for health at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), sat for a conversation with our hosts Emeline Aviki, MD, MBA, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Stephen Schleicher, MD, MBA, Tennessee Oncology, that covered the cancer footprint of the VHA.
Listen
Odevixibat Safe for Alagille Syndrome Based on Hepatic Changes
November 8th 2023Pooled phase 3 data presented at North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition 2023 support the benefit-risk profile of the ileal bile acid transport inhibitor in treating the rare liver disease.
Read More
Exploring Payer Coverage Decisions Following FDA Novel Drug Approvals
May 3rd 2022On this episode of Managed Care Cast, Ari D. Panzer, BS, lead author and researcher, then at Tufts Medical Center—now at Duke University—discusses the findings from his team’s investigation into coverage decisions by health plan insurers of the 66 drugs approved by the FDA in 2018.
Listen