IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor Use and Medical Costs after Initial Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Older Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer

  • Robert I. Griffiths

    (Outcomes Insights, Inc., Westlake Village, CA, USA; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA)

  • Richard L. Barron

    (Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA)

  • Michelle L. Gleeson

    (Outcomes Insights, Inc., Westlake Village, CA, USA)

  • Mark D. Danese

    (Outcomes Insights, Inc., Westlake Village, CA, USA)

  • Anthony OHagan

    (Department of Probability and Statistics, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK)

  • Victoria M. Chia

    (Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA)

  • Jason C. Legg

    (Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA)

  • Gary H. Lyman

    (Duke University and the Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center, Durham, NC, USA)

Registered author(s):

    Background:Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the risk of severe neutropenia associated with chemotherapy, but its cost implications following chemotherapy are unknown. Abstract: Objective:Objective: Our objective was to examine associations between G-CSF use and medical costs after initial adjuvant chemotherapy in early-stage (stage I-III) breast cancer (ESBC). Abstract: Methods:Methods: Women diagnosed with ESBC from 1999 to 2005, who had an initial course of chemotherapy beginning within 180 days of diagnosis and including ≥1 highly myelosuppressive agent, were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Medicare claims were used to describe the initial chemotherapy regimen according to the classes of agents used: anthracycline ([A]: doxorubicin or epirubicin); cyclophosphamide (C); taxane ([T]: paclitaxel or docetaxel); and fluorouracil (F). Patients were classified into four study groups according to their G-CSF use: (i) primary prophylaxis, if the first G-CSF claim was within 5 days of the start of the first chemotherapy cycle; (ii) secondary prophylaxis, if the first claim was within 5 days of the start of the second or subsequent cycles; (iii) G-CSF treatment, if the first claim occurred outside of prophylactic use; and (iv) no G-CSF. Patients were described by age, race, year of diagnosis, stage, grade, estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR) receptor status, National Cancer Institute (NCI) Co-morbidity Index, chemotherapy regimen and G-CSF use. Total direct medical costs ($US, year 2009 values) to Medicare were estimated from 4 weeks after the last chemotherapy administration up to 48 months. Medical costs included those for ESBC treatment and all other medical services received after chemotherapy. Least squares regression, using inverse probability weighting (IPW) to account for censoring within the cohort, was used to evaluate adjusted associations between G-CSF use and costs. Abstract: Results:Results: A total of 7026 patients were identified, with an average age of 72 years, of which 63% had stage II disease, and 59% were ER and/or PR positive. Compared with no G-CSF, those receiving G-CSF primary prophylaxis were more likely to have stage III disease (30% vs 16%; p < 0.0001), to be diagnosed in 2003-5 (87% vs 26%; p < 0.0001), and to receive dose-dense AC-T (26% vs 1%; p < 0.0001), while they were less likely to receive an F-based regimen (12% vs 42%; p < 0.0001). Overall, the estimated average direct medical cost over 48 months after initial chemotherapy was $US42 628. In multivariate analysis, stage II or III diagnosis (compared with stage I), NCI Co-morbidity Index score 1 or ≥2 (compared with 0), or FAC or standard AC-T (each compared with AC) were associated with significantly higher IPW 48-month costs. Adjusting for patient demographic and clinical factors, costs in the G-CSF primary prophylaxis group were not significantly different from those not receiving primary prophylaxis (the other three study groups combined). In an analysis that included four separate study groups, G-CSF treatment was associated with significantly greater costs (incremental cost - $US2938; 95% CI 285, 5590) than no G-CSF. Abstract: Conclusions:Conclusions: Direct medical costs after initial chemotherapy were not statistically different between those receiving G-CSF primary prophylaxis and those receiving no G-CSF, after adjusting for potential confounders.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Pay per view

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Pay per view

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer Healthcare | Adis in its journal PharmacoEconomics.

    Volume (Year): 30 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 2 ()
    Pages: 103-118

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:30:y:2012:i:2:p:103-118
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:30:y:2012:i:2:p:103-118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dave Dustin)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.