Healthcare resource utilization and G‑CSF use in patients with solid tumors or hematological malignancies hospitalized for febrile neutropenia in Bulgaria, Czech Republic and Slovakia
- 68 Downloads
Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a common side effect of chemotherapy that frequently necessitates hospitalization and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), but is poorly studied in Eastern European countries. We investigated HCRU and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) use in patients hospitalized for FN in Bulgaria, Czech Republic, and Slovakia.
Patients and methods
This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years old, had received chemotherapy for solid tumors or hematological malignancies of any stage, and had been hospitalized for FN. The primary objective was to evaluate FN-related HCRU; secondary objectives included the description of chemotherapy treatment patterns and G‑CSF use. Data were analyzed by participating country.
Data of 156 patients from Bulgaria and 79 patients each from the Czech Republic and Slovakia were analyzed. The most frequent solid tumors were breast (n = 28) and testicular cancer (n = 13), and the most common hematological malignancies were non-Hodgkin B‑cell lymphoma (n = 51) and acute myeloid leukemia (n = 35). In general, G‑CSF was used to treat FN rather than as prophylaxis. Most patients had a single FN episode, predominantly in cycle 1. The mean duration of FN-related hospitalization was 7–9 days, with longer stays in patients with hematological malignancies.
Results indicate considerable FN-related HCRU in all countries. Frequent lack of G‑CSF primary prophylaxis was observed, particularly in Slovakia.
KeywordsFebrile neutropenia Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor Health care resource utilization Chemotherapy Central Eastern Europe
absolute neutrophil count
Central Eastern Europe
European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer
granulocyte colony-stimulating factor
healthcare resource utilization
The authors would like to thank the study investigators for participating and enrolling patients into the study. Medical writing assistance was provided by Margit Hemetsberger, hemetsberger medical services, Vienna, Austria, and Olga Garbuzenko, Quartesian, Princeton, NJ, USA.
This study was funded by Amgen Central Eastern Europe Headoffice, Vienna, Austria.
Conflict of interest
G. Mihaylov, Z. Mihaylova, A. Cipkova, and J. Novak declare that they have no competing interests. R. Petrova is an employee of Amgen s.r.o., Sofia, Bulgaria. L. Drgona declares to have received payments from Amgen for patient recruitment and for consultation during study preparation, honoraria for presentations from Sandoz, and consultation fees and honoraria for presentations from Teva.
- 3.Holmes FA, Jones SE, O’Shaughnessy J, et al. Comparable efficacy and safety profiles of once-per-cycle pegfilgrastim and daily injection filgrastim in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: a multicenter dose-finding study in women with breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2002;13(6):903–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Holmes FA, O’Shaughnessy JA, Vukelja S, et al. Blinded, randomized, multicenter study to evaluate single administration pegfilgrastim once per cycle versus daily filgrastim as an adjunct to chemotherapy in patients with high-risk stage II or stage III/IV breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(3):727–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Aapro MS, Bohlius J, Cameron DA, et al. 2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47(1):8–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Weycker D, Danel A, Bendall K, et al. Cost of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia treated in inpatient, outpatient, and home care settings among adults with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in European clinical practice. Blood. 2011;118:4200, ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts.Google Scholar
- 12.Saramago P, Andreozzi V, Ferreira JM, et al. Modelling the direct costs of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia treatment in Portuguese hospitals clinical practice. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(18S):17081, ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition), June 20 Supplement.Google Scholar
- 15.Moeremans K, Caekelbergh K, Spaepen E. et al. Economic aspects and drivers of febrile neutropenia in cancer – a multicentre retrospective analysis in Belgium. ISPOR 8th Annual European Congress, Florence. 2005.Google Scholar
- 17.Vainchtock A, Cohen-Nizard S, Durand-Zaleski I. Analysis of public and private hospital databases (PMSI) 2010/2011 to estimate the frequency and associated costs for febrile neutropenia in france. ISPOR 16th Annual European Congress, Dublin. 2013.Google Scholar
- 18.Mattli R, Pletscher M, Eichler K. et al. Inpatient hospital costs of febrile neutropenia as a consequence of chemotherapy for breast cancer and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma in Switzerland. ISPOR 16th Annual European Congress, Dublin. 2013.Google Scholar
- 26.World Health Organization. Access to new medicines in Europe: technical review of policy initiatives and opportunities for collaboration and research 2015. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/306179/Access-new-medicines-TR-PIO-collaboration-research.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 20 July 2015.Google Scholar