• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of oncology pharmacy practice: official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners >Comparative cost-efficiency across the European G5 countries of various regimens of filgrastim, biosimilar filgrastim, and pegfilgrastim to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia.
【24h】

Comparative cost-efficiency across the European G5 countries of various regimens of filgrastim, biosimilar filgrastim, and pegfilgrastim to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia.

机译：在欧洲五国集团（G5）国家中，非格司亭，仿制药非格司亭和吡格非司亭的不同治疗方案在降低化疗引起的发热性中性粒细胞减少症发病率方面具有相对的成本效益。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This cost-efficiency analysis of the granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) filgrastim (originator Neupogen? and biosimilar Zarzio?) and pegfilgrastim (Neulasta?) examined against a time horizon of 1-14 days of treatment and across the European Union G5 countries (a) when, cost-wise, using Neulasta? 6 mg versus Neupogen? or Zarzio? 300 μg may be cost-saving in reducing the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia; and (b) if cost-wise, treatment with Zarzio? 300?μg yields a savings advantage over Neupogen? 300?μg.Cost-efficiency analysis of the direct costs a buyer or payer would incur when purchasing or covering any of these agents for managing one patient during one cycle of chemotherapy under regimens of 1-14 days of standard filgrastim using the population-weighted average unit dose cost of each agent per their public pack cost across the European G5 countries.The cost of Neupogen? treatment ranged from ?128.16 (1 day) to ?1794.30 (14 days), compared to ?95.46 and ?1336.46 for Zarzio?, thus yielding potential cost savings from ?32.70 to ?457.84 for the latter. Neulasta? turns cost-saving at day 12 of Neupogen? treatment. At no point over a 14-day treatment period did Neulasta? yield a savings advantage over Zarzio?.Prophylaxis or treatment of febrile neutropenia with Zarzio? is cost-efficient under all possible treatment scenarios relative to Neupogen? and to Neulasta?. In the absence of convincing evidence that pegfilgrastim is pharmacotherapeutically superior to standard filgrastim, there is no cost-efficiency rationale to treat with Neulasta? over Zarzio?, though there may be a small window of approximately 3 days where Neulasta? is cost-efficient over Neupogen?. Regardless, our analysis shows Zarzio? to be the most cost-efficient approach to reducing the incidence of febrile neutropenia in chemotherapy-treated patients.
机译：这项针对粒细胞集落刺激因子（G-CSF）的非格司亭（始发者Neupogen？和生物仿制药Zarzio？）和聚乙二醇非格司亭（Neulasta？）的成本效益分析是在1-14天的治疗期间以及整个欧盟进行G5国家（a）在成本上何时使用Neulasta？ 6毫克vs Neupogen？还是Zarzio？ 300μg可以降低化疗引起的发热性中性粒细胞减少症的发生，从而节省成本; （b）如果费用合理，可使用Zarzio治疗？与Neupogen？相比，300？g的节省优势。 300？g对购买者或付款人在购买1种或多于1种标准非格司亭治疗方案的化疗方案中购买或覆盖任何一种药物来管理一名患者的直接费用的成本效益分析，采用人群加权法在欧洲五国集团（G5）国家中，每位代理商按照其公共包装费用所获得的平均单位剂量费用。 Zarzio®的处理成本从？95.46和？1336.46降低到了128.16（1天）至1794.30（14天），从而使后者的成本节省从32.70降低到457.84。 Neulasta？能否在Neupogen的第12天节省成本？治疗。在14天的治疗期内没有任何时间Neulasta吗？与Zarzio®相比，可产生节省的优势。Zarzio®预防或治疗高热性中性粒细胞减少相对于Neupogen，在所有可能的治疗方案中是否具有成本效益？和诺伊斯塔（Neulasta）？在没有令人信服的证据表明培格非司亭在药物治疗上优于标准非格司亭时，使用Neulasta进行治疗没有成本效益的理由吗？在Zarzio？上空，尽管Neulasta可能会有一个约3天的小窗口？比Neupogen更具成本效益？无论如何，我们的分析表明扎尔齐奥？这是减少化疗患者发热性中性粒细胞减少症发病率的最经济有效的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号