IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v30y2012i12d10.2165_11597280-000000000-00000.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chemotherapy Administration

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Haywood

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Johan Raad

    (Utrecht University)

  • Kees Gool

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Marion Haas

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Gisselle Gallego

    (University of Technology Sydney)

  • Sallie-Anne Pearson

    (University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Clinical School)

  • Margaret Faedo

    (University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Clinical School)

  • Robyn Ward

    (University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Clinical School)

Abstract

Background and Objective The increasing cost of chemotherapy is placing greater pressures on limited healthcare budgets. A potentially important, but often overlooked, aspect of chemotherapy is the cost associated with administration. This study aims to develop a better understanding of these costs, and in doing so, develop a model to estimate the comparative cost of administering alternative chemotherapy protocols for economic evaluation or local decision making. Methods We identified the potential tasks and choices related to administering intravenous chemotherapy, grouped tasks according to anticipated resource use, and allocated costs to each task using data from an evidence-based collection of cancer protocols or from primary data collection. The resources were costed from a healthcare system perspective using standard data sources within Australia. The model was applied to alternative protocols used in the treatment of three different cancers: locally advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, adjuvant colorectal cancer and adjuvant breast cancer. Results For the three cancer types examined, the cost of completed administration ranged from 1274 Australian dollars ($A) to $A3015 (year 2009 values) for 13 different protocols potentially used for the initial treatment of locally advanced and metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer; $A5175–8445 for seven protocols for adjuvant colorectal cancer treatment; and $A1494–4074 for seven protocols for adjuvant breast cancer treatment. Conclusions The results are of practical significance to those undertaking economic evaluations and to decision makers who use this information within the area of chemotherapy. The examples used suggest that administration costs per visit varied inversely with the number of visits. The results provide information where little has previously been available and may allow decisions about costs and resource allocation to be made with more certainty. Although our model uses costs from the public health system within an Australian state (New South Wales), it can be adapted for use in other jurisdictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Haywood & Johan Raad & Kees Gool & Marion Haas & Gisselle Gallego & Sallie-Anne Pearson & Margaret Faedo & Robyn Ward, 2012. "Chemotherapy Administration," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(12), pages 1173-1186, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:30:y:2012:i:12:d:10.2165_11597280-000000000-00000
    DOI: 10.2165/11597280-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.2165/11597280-000000000-00000
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11597280-000000000-00000?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    • Philip Haywood & Johan Raad & Kees Gool & Marion Haas & Gisselle Gallego & Sallie-Anne Pearson & Margaret Faedo & Robyn Ward, 2012. "Chemotherapy Administration," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(12), pages 1173-1186, December.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. K. Le Lay & E. Myon & S. Hill & L. Riou-Franca & D. Scott & M. Sidhu & D. Dunlop & R. Launois, 2007. "Comparative cost-minimisation of oral and intravenous chemotherapy for first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer in the UK NHS system," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 8(2), pages 145-151, June.
    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. Wei Xu & Sau Har Lee & Fengjun Qiu & Li Zhou & Xiaoling Wang & Tingjie Ye & Xudong Hu, 2021. "Association of SMAD4 loss with drug resistance in clinical cancer patients: A systematic meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-14, May.
    2. Gursharan K. Sohi & Jordan Levy & Victoria Delibasic & Laura E. Davis & Alyson L. Mahar & Elmira Amirazodi & Craig C. Earle & Julie Hallet & Ahmed Hammad & Rajan Shah & Nicole Mittmann & Natalie G. Co, 2021. "The cost of chemotherapy administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(4), pages 605-620, June.

    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. Peter Bayer & Joel Steven Brown & Johan Dubbeldam & Mark Broom, 2022. "A Markovian decision model of adaptive cancer treatment and quality of life," Working Papers hal-03542494, HAL.

    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:12:d:10.2165_11597280-000000000-00000. 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.