Are National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Block Affordability Ratings Representative of Real-World Costs? An Evaluation of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

Q1 Nursing Journal of Oncology Practice Pub Date : 2019-09-12 DOI:10.1200/JOP.19.00241
Joshua T. Cohen, P. Lin, D. Sheinson, W. Wong, N. Wu, Y. Yim, S. Ramsey
{"title":"Are National Comprehensive Cancer Network Evidence Block Affordability Ratings Representative of Real-World Costs? An Evaluation of Advanced Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.","authors":"Joshua T. Cohen, P. Lin, D. Sheinson, W. Wong, N. Wu, Y. Yim, S. Ramsey","doi":"10.1200/JOP.19.00241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\nThe National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) developed the Evidence Blocks framework to assess the value of oncology regimens. This study characterizes the relationship between real-world costs and NCCN affordability ratings (ARs) for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treatments.\n\n\nMETHODS\nUsing the MarketScan and PharMetrics Plus databases, we identified patients treated between 2012 and 2017 with an aNSCLC regimen evaluated by the NCCN Evidence Blocks. We estimated adjusted mean total per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs and drug costs for each regimen using a log-linked gamma generalized linear model. Weighted regression was used to examine the correlation between adjusted mean PPPM costs per regimen and NCCN AR.\n\n\nRESULTS\nA total of 25,162 patients with aNSCLC (mean age, 63 years [standard deviation, 10 years]; 52% male) had identifiable regimens. Mean total PPPM cost by therapeutic class ranged from $16,824 for epidermal growth factor receptors to $41,815 for immunotherapy-based treatment. Epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitor treatment had lower ARs compared with generic chemotherapy. No therapy was listed as AR group 5 (least expensive). In pairwise comparisons, AR group 1 had significantly higher PPPM total costs compared with AR groups 2 and 4. There were no significant differences in PPPM total cost among AR groups 2, 3, and 4.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nReal-world aNSCLC treatment costs are often inconsistent with the NCCN ARs. Given that NCCN Evidence Blocks are intended to inform provider-patient discussions and other decision support resources, such as the NCCN Categories of Preference, our results suggest that the NCCN ARs require further refinement and validation.","PeriodicalId":54273,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oncology Practice","volume":"1 1","pages":"JOP1900241"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1200/JOP.19.00241","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oncology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1200/JOP.19.00241","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

PURPOSE The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) developed the Evidence Blocks framework to assess the value of oncology regimens. This study characterizes the relationship between real-world costs and NCCN affordability ratings (ARs) for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) treatments. METHODS Using the MarketScan and PharMetrics Plus databases, we identified patients treated between 2012 and 2017 with an aNSCLC regimen evaluated by the NCCN Evidence Blocks. We estimated adjusted mean total per-patient-per-month (PPPM) costs and drug costs for each regimen using a log-linked gamma generalized linear model. Weighted regression was used to examine the correlation between adjusted mean PPPM costs per regimen and NCCN AR. RESULTS A total of 25,162 patients with aNSCLC (mean age, 63 years [standard deviation, 10 years]; 52% male) had identifiable regimens. Mean total PPPM cost by therapeutic class ranged from $16,824 for epidermal growth factor receptors to $41,815 for immunotherapy-based treatment. Epidermal growth factor receptor and anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitor treatment had lower ARs compared with generic chemotherapy. No therapy was listed as AR group 5 (least expensive). In pairwise comparisons, AR group 1 had significantly higher PPPM total costs compared with AR groups 2 and 4. There were no significant differences in PPPM total cost among AR groups 2, 3, and 4. CONCLUSION Real-world aNSCLC treatment costs are often inconsistent with the NCCN ARs. Given that NCCN Evidence Blocks are intended to inform provider-patient discussions and other decision support resources, such as the NCCN Categories of Preference, our results suggest that the NCCN ARs require further refinement and validation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国家综合癌症网络证据块可承受性评级是否代表现实世界成本?晚期非小细胞肺癌癌症的评价。
目的国家癌症综合网络(NCCN)开发了证据块框架,以评估肿瘤治疗方案的价值。本研究描述了实际成本与晚期非小细胞肺癌癌症治疗的NCCN可负担性评级(AR)之间的关系。方法利用MarketScan和PharMetrics Plus数据库,我们确定了2012年至2017年间接受NCCN证据块评估的非小细胞肺癌治疗方案的患者。我们使用对数关联伽马广义线性模型估计了每个方案的调整后的每个患者每月平均总费用(PPPM)和药物费用。加权回归用于检查每个方案的调整后平均PPPM费用与NCCN AR之间的相关性。RESULTSA共有25162名非小细胞肺癌患者(平均年龄63岁[标准差,10岁];52%的男性)有可识别的方案。按治疗类别划分的PPPM平均总成本从表皮生长因子受体的16824美元到基于免疫疗法的41815美元不等。与普通化疗相比,表皮生长因子受体和间变性淋巴瘤激酶抑制剂治疗的ARs较低。没有任何治疗被列为AR组5(费用最低)。在成对比较中,AR组1的PPPM总成本显著高于AR组2和4。AR组2、3和4的PPPM总费用没有显著差异。结论真实世界的NSCLC治疗费用通常与NCCN AR不一致。鉴于NCCN证据块旨在为提供者-患者讨论和其他决策支持资源(如NCCN偏好类别)提供信息,我们的结果表明,NCCN AR需要进一步完善和验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Oncology Practice
Journal of Oncology Practice Nursing-Oncology (nursing)
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Journal of Oncology Practice (JOP) provides necessary information and insights to keep oncology practice current on changes and challenges inherent in delivering quality oncology care. All content dealing with understanding the provision of care—the mechanics of practice—is the purview of JOP. JOP also addresses an expressed need of practicing physicians to have compressed, expert opinion addressing common clinical problems.
期刊最新文献
Improving Documentation of Pain and Constipation Management Within the Cancer Center of a Large Urban Academic Hospital. Integrating Family Caregiver Support Into a Gynecologic Oncology Practice: An ASCO Quality Training Program Project. Impact of an Electronic Medical Record Alert on Code Status Documentation for Hospitalized Patients With Advanced Cancer. Employment Outcomes, Financial Burden, Anxiety, and Depression Among Caregivers of African American Cancer Survivors. Unpacking Trial Offers and Low Accrual Rates: A Qualitative Analysis of Clinic Visits With Physicians and Patients Potentially Eligible for a Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1