Search

Chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) is a debilitating and costly complication following haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). This study describes the economic burden associated with cGVHD. Direct costs associated with specialised healthcare utilisation (inpatient admissions and outpatient visits), as well as indirect costs associated with sickness absence-associated productivity loss were estimated in patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT in Sweden between 2006 and 2015, linking population-based health and economic registers. To capture the period of chronic GVHD, patients were included who survived > 182 days post-HSCT (start of follow-up), and cGVHD was classified based on patient treatment records to correct for any diagnosis underreporting. Patients were classified as 'non-cGVHD' if they received no immunosuppressive treatment, 'mild cGVHD' if they received only systemic corticosteroid treatment or immunosuppressive treatment, or 'moderate-severe cGVHD' if they received extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) only, corticosteroid treatment and immunosuppressive treatment, or systemic corticosteroid treatment and ECP treatments. Patients with moderate-severe cGVHD spent more time in healthcare, had higher healthcare resource costs and higher sickness absence-related productivity loss compared to patients with non- or mild cGVHD. The cumulative total costs during the first 3 years of follow-up were EUR 14,887,599, EUR 20,544,056, and EUR 47,811,835 for non-, mild, and moderate-severe groups, respectively. The long-term costs incurred with cGVHD following HSCT continue to be very high and significantly impacted by cGVHD severity. This study adds real-world health resource and economic insight relevant for policy-makers and healthcare providers when considering the clinical challenge of balancing immunosuppression to reduce cGVHD.

Chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) is a debilitating and costly complication following haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). This study describes the economic burden associated with cGVHD. Direct costs associated with specialised healthcare utilisation (inpatient admissions and outpatient visits), as well as indirect costs associated with sickness absence-associated productivity loss were estimated in patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT in Sweden between 2006 and 2015, linking population-based health and economic registers. To capture the period of chronic GVHD, patients were included who survived > 182 days post-HSCT (start of follow-up), and cGVHD was classified based on patient treatment records to correct for any diagnosis underreporting. Patients were classified as 'non-cGVHD' if they received no immunosuppressive treatment, 'mild cGVHD' if they received only systemic corticosteroid treatment or immunosuppressive treatment, or 'moderate-severe cGVHD' if they received extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) only, corticosteroid treatment and immunosuppressive treatment, or systemic corticosteroid treatment and ECP treatments. Patients with moderate-severe cGVHD spent more time in healthcare, had higher healthcare resource costs and higher sickness absence-related productivity loss compared to patients with non- or mild cGVHD. The cumulative total costs during the first 3 years of follow-up were EUR 14,887,599, EUR 20,544,056, and EUR 47,811,835 for non-, mild, and moderate-severe groups, respectively. The long-term costs incurred with cGVHD following HSCT continue to be very high and significantly impacted by cGVHD severity. This study adds real-world health resource and economic insight relevant for policy-makers and healthcare providers when considering the clinical challenge of balancing immunosuppression to reduce cGVHD.

Chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) is a debilitating and costly complication following haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). This study describes the economic burden associated with cGVHD. Direct costs associated with specialised healthcare utilisation (inpatient admissions and outpatient visits), as well as indirect costs associated with sickness absence-associated productivity loss were estimated in patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT in Sweden between 2006 and 2015, linking population-based health and economic registers. To capture the period of chronic GVHD, patients were included who survived > 182 days post-HSCT (start of follow-up), and cGVHD was classified based on patient treatment records to correct for any diagnosis underreporting. Patients were classified as 'non-cGVHD' if they received no immunosuppressive treatment, 'mild cGVHD' if they received only systemic corticosteroid treatment or immunosuppressive treatment, or 'moderate-severe cGVHD' if they received extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) only, corticosteroid treatment and immunosuppressive treatment, or systemic corticosteroid treatment and ECP treatments. Patients with moderate-severe cGVHD spent more time in healthcare, had higher healthcare resource costs and higher sickness absence-related productivity loss compared to patients with non- or mild cGVHD. The cumulative total costs during the first 3 years of follow-up were EUR 14,887,599, EUR 20,544,056, and EUR 47,811,835 for non-, mild, and moderate-severe groups, respectively. The long-term costs incurred with cGVHD following HSCT continue to be very high and significantly impacted by cGVHD severity. This study adds real-world health resource and economic insight relevant for policy-makers and healthcare providers when considering the clinical challenge of balancing immunosuppression to reduce cGVHD.

Chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) is a debilitating and costly complication following haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). This study describes the economic burden associated with cGVHD. Direct costs associated with specialised healthcare utilisation (inpatient admissions and outpatient visits), as well as indirect costs associated with sickness absence-associated productivity loss were estimated in patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT in Sweden between 2006 and 2015, linking population-based health and economic registers. To capture the period of chronic GVHD, patients were included who survived > 182 days post-HSCT (start of follow-up), and cGVHD was classified based on patient treatment records to correct for any diagnosis underreporting. Patients were classified as 'non-cGVHD' if they received no immunosuppressive treatment, 'mild cGVHD' if they received only systemic corticosteroid treatment or immunosuppressive treatment, or 'moderate-severe cGVHD' if they received extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) only, corticosteroid treatment and immunosuppressive treatment, or systemic corticosteroid treatment and ECP treatments. Patients with moderate-severe cGVHD spent more time in healthcare, had higher healthcare resource costs and higher sickness absence-related productivity loss compared to patients with non- or mild cGVHD. The cumulative total costs during the first 3 years of follow-up were EUR 14,887,599, EUR 20,544,056, and EUR 47,811,835 for non-, mild, and moderate-severe groups, respectively. The long-term costs incurred with cGVHD following HSCT continue to be very high and significantly impacted by cGVHD severity. This study adds real-world health resource and economic insight relevant for policy-makers and healthcare providers when considering the clinical challenge of balancing immunosuppression to reduce cGVHD.

Chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) is a debilitating and costly complication following haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). This study describes the economic burden associated with cGVHD. Direct costs associated with specialised healthcare utilisation (inpatient admissions and outpatient visits), as well as indirect costs associated with sickness absence-associated productivity loss were estimated in patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT in Sweden between 2006 and 2015, linking population-based health and economic registers. To capture the period of chronic GVHD, patients were included who survived > 182 days post-HSCT (start of follow-up), and cGVHD was classified based on patient treatment records to correct for any diagnosis underreporting. Patients were classified as 'non-cGVHD' if they received no immunosuppressive treatment, 'mild cGVHD' if they received only systemic corticosteroid treatment or immunosuppressive treatment, or 'moderate-severe cGVHD' if they received extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) only, corticosteroid treatment and immunosuppressive treatment, or systemic corticosteroid treatment and ECP treatments. Patients with moderate-severe cGVHD spent more time in healthcare, had higher healthcare resource costs and higher sickness absence-related productivity loss compared to patients with non- or mild cGVHD. The cumulative total costs during the first 3 years of follow-up were EUR 14,887,599, EUR 20,544,056, and EUR 47,811,835 for non-, mild, and moderate-severe groups, respectively. The long-term costs incurred with cGVHD following HSCT continue to be very high and significantly impacted by cGVHD severity. This study adds real-world health resource and economic insight relevant for policy-makers and healthcare providers when considering the clinical challenge of balancing immunosuppression to reduce cGVHD.

The outcome for multiple myeloma patients has improved since the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide. However, studies comparing new and conventional treatment include selected patient groups. We investigated consecutive patients (n = 1638) diagnosed in a defined period and compared survival with a gender- and age-matched cohort Swedish population (n = 9 340 682). Median overall survival for non-high-dose treated patients was 2.8 years. The use of bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide in first line therapy predicted a significantly longer overall survival (median 4.9 years) compared to conventional treatment (2.3 years). Among non-high-dose treated patients receiving at least 2 lines with bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, 69% and 63% have survived at 3 and 5 years as compared to 48% and 22% with conventional drugs and 88% and 79% in the matched cohort populations, respectively. The median overall survival in high-dose treated patients was 6.9 years. Of these patients, 84% survived at 3 years and 70% at 5 years as compared to 98% and 95% in the matched cohort population. Overall survival in the best non-high-dose treated outcome group is closing the gap with the matched cohort. Upfront use of new drugs is clearly better than waiting until later lines of treatment.

The outcome for multiple myeloma patients has improved since the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide. However, studies comparing new and conventional treatment include selected patient groups. We investigated consecutive patients (n = 1638) diagnosed in a defined period and compared survival with a gender- and age-matched cohort Swedish population (n = 9 340 682). Median overall survival for non-high-dose treated patients was 2.8 years. The use of bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide in first line therapy predicted a significantly longer overall survival (median 4.9 years) compared to conventional treatment (2.3 years). Among non-high-dose treated patients receiving at least 2 lines with bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, 69% and 63% have survived at 3 and 5 years as compared to 48% and 22% with conventional drugs and 88% and 79% in the matched cohort populations, respectively. The median overall survival in high-dose treated patients was 6.9 years. Of these patients, 84% survived at 3 years and 70% at 5 years as compared to 98% and 95% in the matched cohort population. Overall survival in the best non-high-dose treated outcome group is closing the gap with the matched cohort. Upfront use of new drugs is clearly better than waiting until later lines of treatment., QC 20140321

The outcome for multiple myeloma patients has improved since the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide. However, studies comparing new and conventional treatment include selected patient groups. We investigated consecutive patients (n = 1638) diagnosed in a defined period and compared survival with a gender- and age-matched cohort Swedish population (n = 9 340 682). Median overall survival for non-high-dose treated patients was 2.8 years. The use of bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide in first line therapy predicted a significantly longer overall survival (median 4.9 years) compared to conventional treatment (2.3 years). Among non-high-dose treated patients receiving at least 2 lines with bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, 69% and 63% have survived at 3 and 5 years as compared to 48% and 22% with conventional drugs and 88% and 79% in the matched cohort populations, respectively. The median overall survival in high-dose treated patients was 6.9 years. Of these patients, 84% survived at 3 years and 70% at 5 years as compared to 98% and 95% in the matched cohort population. Overall survival in the best non-high-dose treated outcome group is closing the gap with the matched cohort. Upfront use of new drugs is clearly better than waiting until later lines of treatment.

Background: Induction therapy for multiple myeloma (MM) and remission status before high-dose treatment (HDT) have been shown to be prognostic factors for survival outcome, although the optimal induction therapy is yet to be defined. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of the impact of induction therapy on survival outcome before and after HDT in MM patients. The study included 236 consecutive patients who underwent HDT. Results: One hundred and forty-two patients (62%) were treated with vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone (VAD) or cyclophosphamide and betamethasone (CyBet) and 94 (38%) were treated with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and betamethasone (VCB) as induction. Time to first and time to best response was faster in the VCB group than in the VAD/CyBet group, with 42 versus 75 (p < 0.001) and 54 versus 88 days (p < 0.001), respectively. After induction therapy, 49% of the patients in the VCB group and 38% in the VAD/CyBet group achieved a very good partial response or better. Multivariate analysis revealed younger age, lower International Staging System stage and induction treatment with VCB as variables associated with favourable time to progression. Conclusions:Outcome measured as response and time to progression before and after HDT in MM differs depending on type of induction treatment and suggests that VCB is a highly effective induction regimen that confers a post-HDT advantage., De två (2) första författarna delar förstaförfattarskapet.

QC 20130311

QC 20130311

QC 20120312

QC 20150624