Organization of chemotherapeutic preparations in advance: Do we save or waste money?

Objective The development of oncology day-hospital activities contributes to increase quality of life of patients and consequently have changed their perception about waiting. The extemporaneous preparation of antineoplastic has become difficult to achieve given the increasing activity, and hospital pharmacists have taken up the challenge by the implementation of the antineoplastic preparation in anticipation. Because anticipation can lead to an important number of preparations to be discarded, we also develop a recycled process for other patients to limit these waste extra costs. We aim to demonstrate the positive balance of anticipated preparation in this 4-year study report. Data sources: This prospective study was conducted in a major European oncology day-hospital from January, 2012 to December, 2015. The data were extracted from our software WinSimbad™ and updated as needed. The number and cost-associated of preparation ungiven chemotherapy doses (recycled or discarded) were compared to the global drug budget of our hospital in order to not exceed 2%. Data summary: 303,100 antineoplastic have been prepared. Approximately 35% of them were anticipated with an average of 5,431±984 that were finally ungiven. Two-third was recycled and the cost of the ungiven preparations finally discarded represents 1.7±0.15% of the global drug budget. Conclusions This study assesses the drug wastage and its associated cost of this concept through a prospective study and discusses the cost of ungiven antineoplastic preparations. With prior consideration of the need to define the acceptable rate of discarded ungiven preparation, the hospitals with an high oncology day-hospital activity should implement this approach.

A Budget impact analysis of pegfilgrastim biosimilar in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in Italy

Introduction: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs) can significantly reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) among certain patients receiving chemotherapy. FN is associated with significant clinical and nonclinical complications. At present, the patent protection of pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®) has expired, and a biosimilar (Ziextenzo®) has been approved. Since the biosimilar price is expected to be lower as compared with the originator’s, the present Drug Budget Impact analysis tries to evaluate whether and how much profitable the biosimilar availability will be for the Italian NHS, in terms of cost containment (savings).Methods and Results: The model time horizon extends to five years. The initial overall number of treatments with pegfilgrastim is estimated based on the number of pegfilgrastim packages (assuming a recommended dose of 6 mg is administered after each cytotoxic chemotherapy) and kept constant in time. The model assumes that, year by year, the number of treatments with the originator will partly switch to the biosimilar (according to an uptake rate assumed). The results show that the availability of the biosimilar would provide an €6.4 million cumulated savings to the NHS in the five years.Conclusions: According to the present analysis, the availability of the biosimilar would generate cumulated savings (in five years) as high as €6.4 million for the Italian NHS. (HTA & Market Access)

Bivalirudin Medication Use Evaluation and Cost Savings Initiative

Bivalirudin is a parenteral anticoagulant that elicits its effect through inhibition of both free and clot bound-thrombin. Inhibition of thrombin serves as a unique mechanism for anticoagulation when compared to heparin as thrombin serves as the final common pathway for the intrinsic and extrinsic coagulation cascades. Due to unclear benefit over heparin, concerns regarding reversibility, and most importantly cost its use as a parenteral anticoagulant varies by institution. A recent drug expenditure review within our institution noted a significant increase in the contribution bivalirudin had on the overall drug budget. In an effort to establish the rationale for the cost increase, a medication use evaluation was performed. While it was discovered that 625 out of 1364 days of bivalirudin therapy were potentially avoidable, an equally important discovery was the amount of waste that was associated with bivalirudin therapy. Calculating daily requirements for bivalirudin indicated that 60% of patients required less than 100 mg per day. Within this article, we describe a cost-savings initiative to reduce bivalirudin waste and the resulting cost-avoidance following implementation.