IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v30y2012i2p103-118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Griffiths
  • Richard Barron
  • Michelle Gleeson
  • Mark Danese
  • Anthony O’Hagan
  • Victoria Chia
  • Jason Legg
  • Gary Lyman

Abstract

Background: Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) reduces the risk of severe neutropenia associated with chemotherapy, but its cost implications following chemotherapy are unknown. 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). 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. 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 48months 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. 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. Copyright Springer International Publishing AG 2012

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Griffiths & Richard Barron & Michelle Gleeson & Mark Danese & Anthony O’Hagan & Victoria Chia & Jason Legg & Gary Lyman, 2012. "Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor Use and Medical Costs after Initial Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Older Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 103-118, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:30:y:2012:i:2:p:103-118
    DOI: 10.2165/11589440-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11589440-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11589440-000000000-00000?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. Cattaneo, Matias D. & Crump, Richard K. & Jansson, Michael, 2014. "Bootstrapping Density-Weighted Average Derivatives," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(6), pages 1135-1164, December.
    2. Guido W. Imbens, 2004. "Nonparametric Estimation of Average Treatment Effects Under Exogeneity: A Review," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(1), pages 4-29, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. van de Walle, Dominique & Mu, Ren, 2007. "Fungibility and the flypaper effect of project aid: Micro-evidence for Vietnam," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 667-685, November.
    2. Lechner, Michael, 2018. "Modified Causal Forests for Estimating Heterogeneous Causal Effects," IZA Discussion Papers 12040, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Alexandre Belloni & Victor Chernozhukov & Denis Chetverikov & Christian Hansen & Kengo Kato, 2018. "High-dimensional econometrics and regularized GMM," CeMMAP working papers CWP35/18, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    4. Turner, Alex J. & Fichera, Eleonora & Sutton, Matt, 2021. "The effects of in-utero exposure to influenza on mental health and mortality risk throughout the life-course," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    5. Paulo M. D. C. Parente & Richard J. Smith, 2021. "Quasi‐maximum likelihood and the kernel block bootstrap for nonlinear dynamic models," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 377-405, July.
    6. Roxana Elena Manea, 2021. "School Feeding Programmes, Education and Food Security in Rural Malawi," CIES Research Paper series 63-2020, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    7. 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.
    8. José de Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2021. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Post-Print hal-03389151, HAL.
    9. repec:ags:jrapmc:122316 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. 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.
    11. G. Miller & Yuriy Pylypchuk, 2014. "Marital Status, Spousal Characteristics, and the Use of Preventive Care," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 323-338, September.
    12. Kitagawa, Toru & Muris, Chris, 2016. "Model averaging in semiparametric estimation of treatment effects," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 193(1), pages 271-289.
    13. Michael Lechner & Ruth Miquel & Conny Wunsch, 2011. "Long‐Run Effects Of Public Sector Sponsored Training In West Germany," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 742-784, August.
    14. Li, Linjie & Liu, Xiaming & Yuan, Dong & Yu, Miaojie, 2017. "Does outward FDI generate higher productivity for emerging economy MNEs? – Micro-level evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 839-854.
    15. Olivier Dagnelie & Philippe Lemay‐Boucher, 2012. "Rosca Participation in Benin: A Commitment Issue," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 74(2), pages 235-252, April.
    16. Frölich, Markus & Lechner, Michael, 2010. "Exploiting Regional Treatment Intensity for the Evaluation of Labor Market Policies," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 105(491), pages 1014-1029.
    17. Ralf Becker & Maggy Fostier, 2015. "Evaluating non-compulsory educational interventions - the case of peer assisted study groups," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1509, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    18. Katie Meara & Francesco Pastore & Allan Webster, 2020. "The gender pay gap in the USA: a matching study," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 271-305, January.
    19. Ronald Mincy & Jennifer Hill & Marilyn Sinkewicz, 2009. "Marriage: Cause or mere indicator of future earnings growth?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 417-439.
    20. Lou, Jiehong & Shen, Xingchi & Niemeier, Deb, 2020. "Are stay-at-home orders more difficult to follow for low-income groups?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    21. Gernandt, Johannes & Maier, Michael & Pfeiffer, Friedhelm & Rat-Wirtzler, Julie, 2006. "Distributional effects of the high school degree in Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-088, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:2:p:103-118. 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.