Skip to main content
Log in

Economic Evaluation of Lenograstim for Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer

  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The impact of lenograstim, recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, on healthcare costs was evaluated on the basis of the results of a clinical trial of the drug in patients receiving VICE (vincristine, ifosfamide, carboplatin and etoposide) chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). The use of lenograstim resulted in a significant (p < 0.03) increase in the cumulative chemotherapy dose intensity (125% with lenograstim vs 118% without).

Lenograstim was found to have no significant impact on the use of healthcare resources for administration of chemotherapy, chemotherapy-induced neutropenia, and associated infections. The cost of healthcare for the lenograstim group (excluding lenograstim acquisition costs) was £700 higher per patient than that for the group not treated with lenograstim (95% CI −£930 to £2300).

The use of lenograstim to intensify the chemotherapy dose is likely to increase the costs of treatment for SCLC. However, any increased costs need to be balanced against the potential cost savings associated with the possible long term benefits resulting from chemotherapy dose intensification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Woll PJ, Hodgketts H, Lomax L, et al. Use of rHuG-CSF (lenograstim) to dose intensify in small cell lung cancer (SCLC): a randomised study [abstract]. Eur J Cancer; 29A Suppl. 6: S154

  2. Drummond MF, O’Brien B. Clinical importance, statistical significance and the assessment of economic and quality of life outcome. Health Economics 1993; 2: 205–12

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Chartered Institute of Public Finance Accountants. Health service trends. The CIPFA database. London: Healthcare Financial Management Association, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chartered Institute of Public Finance Accountants. The health database 1990. Health service trends. London: Healthcare Financial Management Association, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  5. Review Body on Doctors’ and Dentists’ Remuneration. Twenty second report. Cmd paper 1813. London: HMSO, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  6. Review Body for Nursing Staff, Midwives, Health Visitors and Professions Allied to Medicine. Ninth report on nursing staff, midwives and health visitors. Cmd paper 1811. London: HMSO, 1992

    Google Scholar 

  7. Joint Formulary Committee. British National Formulary. British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. London: 1993

  8. Mollo S. Towards better costing. Health and Social Service Journal 1980; 18: 339–41

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pulse in practice. Pulse 1989; 29: 78

    Google Scholar 

  10. National Association of Health Authorities (NAHA). NHS Economic Review. Birmingham: NAHA, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  11. National Association of Health Authorities and Trusts (NAHAT) The autumn 1990 survey: a survey of district health authorities financial position. Birmingham: NAHAT, 1991

  12. Nuffield Hospitals. Hospital Charges. Nuffield Hospitals: 1989

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Drummond, M., Davies, L. Economic Evaluation of Lenograstim for Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer. Pharmacoeconomics 6 (Suppl 2), 44–52 (1994). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199400062-00008

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199400062-00008

Keywords

Navigation