PURPOSE Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) of any grade occurs in 56%-80% of bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) used in multiple myeloma (MM). Risk mitigation strategies are required to expedite escalation of care if toxicities develop. The rarity of grade 3 or 4 CRS compels protocolized outpatient management of BsAbs as outpatient practice may avoid hospital admissions and costly resource utilization without compromising safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with MM who received BsAb step-up dosing (SUD) from August 23, 2023, to March 29, 2024, were enrolled. Baseline demographics, patient outcomes, and CRS management were reviewed to assess the safety of outpatient practice. Resource utilization was also analyzed. RESULTS In this study, 34 patients received outpatient SUD of BsAbs (teclistamab n = 17, talequetamab n = 17) with 16 remaining outpatient throughout the entire SUD period. CRS occurred in seven patients who did not require hospitalization, demonstrating the safety of outpatient management of BsAb toxicity, regardless of low-grade CRS. CRS was observed in 24 patients (maximum grade 2) and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome in four patients (maximum grade 3). All patients with CRS received steroids, including 12 patients at home when instructed. Tocilizumab was given to 13 patients, accounting for 18 doses. If all doses of BsAbs and tocilizumab were given outpatient, the medication margin would be $115,004 in US dollars (USD). CONCLUSION An outpatient-based practice for BsAb administration demonstrated safety and cost savings. The description of our practice and results of this study provide valuable insights into the safety, feasibility, and resource stewardship of outpatient management of BsAbs. Future research should attempt to predict and stratify CRS risk to deliver a tailored supportive strategy and continued increase of outpatient management.
Clicks away from reduced healthcare expenditures: leveraging the electronic health record to reinforce education efforts
Objectives Lupron 11.25 mg has both a narrow indication and a high cost compared to other Lupron presentations. Prior to our study initiation there was no clear distinction between presentations when ordering within the health-system’s Electronic Health Record (EHR). This resulted in inappropriate product selection, payment and billing errors that negatively impact our healthcare system. To reinforce prior education efforts, a new approach was considered leveraging the EHR with information to steer prescribers to the proper Lupron presentation based on indication. This study aimed to reduce off-label prescribing for Lupron 11.25 mg (NDC 00074-3663-03) by 25% by 02/28/2022 without negatively impacting the insurance collection rate. Methods Baseline Lupron 11.25 mg adult kit administrations one year prior to intervention and off-label prescribing was found to account for 22.7% of administrations. In December 2021 intervention order questions were added to Lupron 11.25 mg in the EHR. One and two-month data was obtained after implementing order questions within the EHR. Lupron 11.25 mg administrations were classified into one of four categories to determine impact on off-label prescribing. Results In the one- and two-month post-implementation periods off-label prescribing was 0% and 15.3% respectively, a reduction of 22.7% to and 7.4% respectively from the baseline assessment. There were no clinical denials found in either post-implementation reporting period. Conclusion This report adds to the body of evidence that leveraging the EHR can lead to healthcare savings and illustrates how patient and healthcare system burden can be reduced by prompting thought and direction when a medication has indication specific dose requirements.
Economic Cost and Sustainability of Oral Therapies in Precision Oncology
PURPOSE: Precision oncology promises improved outcomes but the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of targeted therapies is debatable. We report price change patterns from 2015 to 2019 for several oral anticancer medications for common solid tumor malignancies. METHODS: We collected provider utilization and payment data from the public Medicare Part D database and extracted drug price information for commonly prescribed targeted oral anticancer agents for lung, breast, and prostate cancer. We then calculated median Pearson correlation coefficient values for various drugs (containing more than two data points) within each therapeutic class. We also calculated compound annual growth rates (CAGRs) for medication costs within each class and compared them with the consumer price index (CPI). RESULTS: Our study included six epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi; one generic), five anaplastic lymphoma kinase inhibitors (ALKi), two B-Raf inhibitors (BRAFi), three hormonal agents (one generic), three cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i), two poly-ADP-ribose inhibitors (PARPi), and seven antiandrogen agents (two generic). The median (range) Pearson correlation coefficient values for cost of drugs within each therapeutic class were 0.967 (0.915-0.978) for EGFRi, 0.981 (0.966-0.989) for ALKi, 0.996 for BRAFi, 0.994 (0.992-0.999) for CDK4/6i, 0.855 for PARPi, and 0.442 (–0.522 to 0.962) for antiandrogens. Therapies with two or fewer data points (generic erlotinib, dacomitinib, abiraterone, apalutamide, and darolutamide) were excluded. The median CAGRs in costs over the 5-year period were 4.56% (EGFRi), 6.40% (ALKi), 2.58% (BRAFi), 5.48% (hormonal agents), 5.21% (CDK4/6i), 27.29% (PARPi), and 34.8% (antiandrogens). The CPI over 5 years was 2.26%/year, and the average inflation rate was 1.90%/year. CONCLUSION: The median CAGR in costs for modern oral precision-driven cancer therapeutic classes mostly outpaced CPI and the average inflation. Increase in cost within the same class should be weighed against incremental clinical benefit for the patients to ensure that rising costs do not limit access to targeted therapies.
Trends in Prices of Drugs Used to Treat Metastatic Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer in the US From 2015 to 2020