IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v10y2012i6p431-440.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Implications of Rasburicase Treatment in Adult Patients with Tumour Lysis Syndrome

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Eaddy
  • Brian Seal
  • Krishna Tangirala
  • Elizabeth Hackney Davies
  • Ken O’Day

Abstract

Background: Rasburicase is a recombinant urate-oxidase enzyme used to reduce high levels of plasma uric acid (PUA) resulting from tumour lysis syndrome (TLS). Rasburicase reduces PUA levels within 4 hours of administration, thereby minimizing the risk of serious complications from TLS. Treatment pattern analyses indicate rasburicase is often used in combination with allopurinol; however, no studies have evaluated the clinical and economic consequences of this pattern of care. The purpose of this study was to compare hospitalization costs, overall length of stay (LOS), and critical-care LOS in patients receiving rasburicase with or without allopurinol. Methods: Hospital claims data from the Premier Perspective Database™ were used to conduct this retrospective analysis. Patients in the Premier hospital database who were administered rasburicase or combination therapy (rasburicase + allopurinol) within 2 days of hospital admission were eligible for study inclusion. Patients were excluded if they were >18 years of age or received haemodialysis (or any other renal replacement therapy support) on admission. Rasburicase patients were propensity-score-matched to combination therapy patients based on gender, race, hospital type (urban/rural, teaching), provider type, payer type, admission source, use of electrolyte modification therapy, critical-care admission and presence of a cancer diagnosis. Differences in healthcare costs, overall LOS and critical-care LOS were assessed using g-distributed generalized linear models with a log-link function. Results: The study population comprised 66 patients receiving rasburicase monotherapy matched to 66 patients receiving combination therapy. Mean age was 62.9 years, and 29% were female. Patients initiated on combination therapy had a shorter mean duration of rasburicase administration than patients initiated on monotherapy (2.1 vs 2.7 days) [p=0.0059]. Additionally, rasburicase monotherapy incurred an average total cost of $US35 843 per hospitalization, compared with $US46 672 for those receiving combination therapy (p=0.0820). Rasburicase monotherapy patients also had a shorter mean overall LOS (10.0 days vs 15.4 days; p=0.0067). The mean critical-care LOS was similar in both cohorts (2.4 days rasburicase vs 2.9 days combination therapy; p=0.3389). Conclusion: Examination of claims data showed that combination therapy (rasburicase + allopurinol) trended toward higher total hospitalization costs than rasburicase monotherapy. In addition, combination therapy was associated with significantly longer overall LOS compared with upfront rasburicase monotherapy in patients at risk for developing TLS. Copyright Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Eaddy & Brian Seal & Krishna Tangirala & Elizabeth Hackney Davies & Ken O’Day, 2012. "Economic Implications of Rasburicase Treatment in Adult Patients with Tumour Lysis Syndrome," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 431-440, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:10:y:2012:i:6:p:431-440
    DOI: 10.1007/BF03261877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF03261877
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF03261877?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:10:y:2012:i:6:p:431-440. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.