Polish
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Journal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology

A pharmacoeconomic analysis of pegaspargase versus native Escherichia coli L-asparaginase for the treatment of children with standard-risk, acute lymphoblastic leukemia: the Children's Cancer Group study (CCG-1962).

Tylko zarejestrowani użytkownicy mogą tłumaczyć artykuły
Zaloguj się Zarejestruj się
Link zostanie zapisany w schowku
Helen A Kurre
Alice G Ettinger
David L Veenstra
Paul S Gaynon
Janet Franklin
Susan F Sencer
Gregory H Reaman
Beverly J Lange
John S Holcenberg

Słowa kluczowe

Abstrakcyjny

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this pharmacoeconomic analysis was to compare pegaspargase. a newer chemotherapeutic agent used for treating acute lymphoblastic leukemia, with native Escherichia coli L-asparaginase in induction, delayed intensification 1 and delayed intensification 2.

METHODS

A subset of patients with newly diagnosed, standard-risk, acute lymphoblastic leukemia enrolled in the Children's Cancer Group (CCG) study CCG-1962 at seven participating institutions gave consent and was enrolled in our pharmacoeconomic analysis study. Societal (transportation, lodging, missed workdays, food, babysitter) and payer (frequency of encounters) cost data were collected from diaries (n = 27). Additional payer costs, such as drug costs, cost per clinic visit, and cost per inpatient day stay were collected from patients in CCG-1962 and participating institutions. We considered costs of therapy, including higher pegaspargase costs when comparing regimens of pegaspargase versus native E. coli L-asparaginase in induction, delayed intensification 1, and delayed intensification 2.

RESULTS

Our results showed that the costs of the two therapies were similar from the payer perspective, with pegaspargase costing 1.8% more than E. coli L-asparaginase. The difference between groups also was small (<1%) from the societal perspective. Inpatient stay accounted for 88% of pegaspargase payer costs and 91% of the native E. coli L-asparaginase costs.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that pegaspargase not be withheld from treatment protocols solely because of its higher pharmacy costs.

Dołącz do naszej strony
na Facebooku

Najbardziej kompletna baza danych ziół leczniczych poparta naukowo

  • Działa w 55 językach
  • Ziołowe leki poparte nauką
  • Rozpoznawanie ziół na podstawie obrazu
  • Interaktywna mapa GPS - oznacz zioła na miejscu (wkrótce)
  • Przeczytaj publikacje naukowe związane z Twoim wyszukiwaniem
  • Szukaj ziół leczniczych po ich działaniu
  • Uporządkuj swoje zainteresowania i bądź na bieżąco z nowościami, badaniami klinicznymi i patentami

Wpisz objaw lub chorobę i przeczytaj o ziołach, które mogą pomóc, wpisz zioło i zobacz choroby i objawy, na które są stosowane.
* Wszystkie informacje oparte są na opublikowanych badaniach naukowych

Google Play badgeApp Store badge