IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v30y2012i9p809-823.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Costs Associated with Febrile Neutropenia in the US

Author

Listed:
  • Shannon Michels
  • Rich Barron
  • Matthew Reynolds
  • Karen Tomic
  • Jingbo Yu
  • Gary Lyman

Abstract

Background and Objective: Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a potentially life-threatening condition that may develop in cancer patients treated with myelosuppressive chemotherapy and result in considerable costs. This study was designed to estimate US healthcare utilization and costs in those experiencing FN by location of care, tumour type and mortality. Methods: Cancer patients who received chemotherapy between 2001 and 2006 were identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database®, a longitudinal claims database with enrolment, medical, prescription and mortality information covering 12 health plans and more than 20 million US patients. Patients who experienced FN were prospectively matched using propensity score methods within each tumour type of interest (non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, breast, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer) to those not experiencing FN. Health resource utilization was compared per patient per month for unique prescriptions and visits (inpatient and outpatient) over the length of follow-up. Healthcare total paid costs adjusted to 2009 US dollars per patient per month were examined by FN group (FN vs non-FN, FN died vs FN survived), by source of care (physician office visit, outpatient services, hospitalization and prescriptions) and by tumour type. The number of unique FN-related encounters (inpatient and outpatient) and the number of patients experiencing at least one FN-related encounter were examined. The costs per encounter were tabulated. FN encounters differ from FN episodes in that a single FN episode may include multiple FN encounters (i.e. a patient is seen multiple times [encounters] for treatment of a single FN event [episode]). Results: A total of 5990 patients each were successfully matched between the FN and non-FN (control) groups. Health resource utilization was generally higher in those with FN than in controls. FN patients incurred greater costs (mean ± SD: $US9628±12517 per patient-month) than non-FN patients ($US8478±12978). Chemotherapy comprised the majority of costs for both FN (33.5%) and non-FN (40.6%) patients. The largest cost difference by categorical source of care was for hospitalization (p>0.001). FN patients who died had the highest mean total costs compared with FN surviving patients ($US21 214 ± 25 596 per patient-month vs $US8227 ± 8850, respectively). Follow-up time for those surviving was, on average, 6.6 months longer. Hospitalization accounted for 53.1% of costs in those experiencing mortality with FN, while chemotherapy accounted for the majority of costs (37.1%) in surviving FN patients. A total of 6574 patients with at least one FN encounter experienced a total of 55 726 unique FN-related encounters, 90% of which were outpatient in nature. The majority of FN-related encounters (79%) occurred during the first chemotherapy course. The average costs for FN encounters were highest for inpatient encounters, $US22 086 ± 43 407, compared with $US985±1677 for outpatient encounters. Conclusions: The occurrence of FN in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy results in greater healthcare resource utilization and costs, with FN patients who die accounting for the greatest healthcare costs. Most FN patients experience at least one outpatient FN encounter, and the total cost of treatment for FN continues to be high. Copyright Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Shannon Michels & Rich Barron & Matthew Reynolds & Karen Tomic & Jingbo Yu & Gary Lyman, 2012. "Costs Associated with Febrile Neutropenia in the US," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(9), pages 809-823, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:30:y:2012:i:9:p:809-823
    DOI: 10.2165/11592980-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11592980-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11592980-000000000-00000?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James J. Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Petra E. Todd, 1997. "Matching As An Econometric Evaluation Estimator: Evidence from Evaluating a Job Training Programme," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 64(4), pages 605-654.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiao Jun Wang & Tiffany Tang & Mohamad Farid & Richard Quek & Miriam Tao & Soon Thye Lim & Hwee Lin Wee & Alexandre Chan, 2016. "Routine Primary Prophylaxis for Febrile Neutropenia with Biosimilar Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (Nivestim) or Pegfilgrastim Is Cost Effective in Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients undergoing Cura," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-12, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Pufahl & Christoph R. Weiss, 2009. "Evaluating the effects of farm programmes: results from propensity score matching," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 36(1), pages 79-101, March.
    2. Ellison, Richard B. & Ellison, Adrian B. & Greaves, Stephen P. & Sampaio, Breno, 2017. "Electronic ticketing systems as a mechanism for travel behaviour change? Evidence from Sydney’s Opal card," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 80-93.
    3. Hye Yoon Chung & Youjin Hahn, 2021. "Work Transitions, Gender, and Subjective Well-Being," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 16(5), pages 2085-2109, October.
    4. González-Uribe, Juanita & Reyes, Santiago, 2021. "Identifying and boosting “Gazelles”: Evidence from business accelerators," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 260-287.
    5. Dettmann, E. & Becker, C. & Schmeißer, C., 2011. "Distance functions for matching in small samples," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 55(5), pages 1942-1960, May.
    6. Alexander Hijzen & Sébastien Jean & Thierry Mayer, 2011. "The effects at home of initiating production abroad: evidence from matched French firms," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 147(3), pages 457-483, September.
    7. Gunther Bensch & Jörg Peters, 2013. "Alleviating Deforestation Pressures? Impacts of Improved Stove Dissemination on Charcoal Consumption in Urban Senegal," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(4), pages 676-698.
    8. James J. Heckman, 1991. "Randomization and Social Policy Evaluation Revisited," NBER Technical Working Papers 0107, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Jeffrey Smith, 2000. "A Critical Survey of Empirical Methods for Evaluating Active Labor Market Policies," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 136(III), pages 247-268, September.
    10. Agnes Quisumbing & Neha Kumar, 2011. "Does social capital build women's assets? The long-term impacts of group-based and individual dissemination of agricultural technology in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 220-242.
    11. Meng, Xuechen & Lin, Shanlang & Zhu, Xiaochuan, 2018. "The resource redistribution effect of high-speed rail stations on the economic growth of neighbouring regions: Evidence from China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 178-191.
    12. Jan Fałkowski & Maciej Jakubowski & Paweł Strawiński, 2014. "Returns from income strategies in rural Poland," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 22(1), pages 139-178, January.
    13. Cameron Truong, 2013. "The January effect, does options trading matter?," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 38(1), pages 31-48, April.
    14. Ichimura, Hidehiko & Todd, Petra E., 2007. "Implementing Nonparametric and Semiparametric Estimators," Handbook of Econometrics, in: J.J. Heckman & E.E. Leamer (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 6, chapter 74, Elsevier.
    15. Hirota, Haruaki & Iwata, Kazuyuki & Tanaka, Kenta, 2022. "Is public official training effective at reducing costs? Evidence from survey data on Japanese municipal mergers," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 145-158.
    16. Sant’Anna, Pedro H.C. & Zhao, Jun, 2020. "Doubly robust difference-in-differences estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 219(1), pages 101-122.
    17. Jerzy Michalek & Pavel Ciaian & d’Artis Kancs, 2014. "Capitalization of the Single Payment Scheme into Land Value: Generalized Propensity Score Evidence from the European Union," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(2), pages 260-289.
    18. Emanuela Galasso & Martin Ravallion, 2004. "Social Protection in a Crisis: Argentina's Plan Jefes y Jefas," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 18(3), pages 367-399.
    19. Gabrielle Wills, 2016. "Principal leadership changes in South Africa: Investigating their consequences for school performance," Working Papers 01/2016, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    20. Gary Goertz & Tony Hak & Jan Dul, 2013. "Ceilings and Floors," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 42(1), pages 3-40, February.

    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:pharme:v:30:y:2012:i:9:p:809-823. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.