Program

In-person AND virtual! – We are pioneering a new conference format that will connect in-person and virtual audiences to create a unique experience. Matching the innovation that comes through our members’ work, ISPOR is pushing the boundaries of innovation to design an event that works in today’s quickly changing environment. 

In-person registration included the full virtual experience, and virtual-only attendees will be able to tune into live in-person sessions and/or watch captured in-person sessions on-demand in addition to having a variety of virtual-only sessions to attend.

Real-World Treatment Patterns and Costs in Relapsed and Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the United States

Speaker(s)

Mutebi A1, Jun M2, Flores C3, Wang Z3, Wang A4, Elliot B1, Navarro FR5, Kalsekar A1
1Genmab US, Inc, Princeton, NJ, USA, 2Genmab US, Inc, Plainsboro, NJ, USA, 3Genesis Research Group, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 4AbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA, 5Genmab A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark

OBJECTIVES: To examine real-world treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization and costs among third-line (3L) relapsed and refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients in the United States.

METHODS: A retrospective claims analysis was carried out using the IBM® MarketScan® Database (Jan 2015-Dec 2019) to assess treatment patterns and costs among adult DLBCL patients receiving 3L treatment. A diagnosis of DLBCL (ICD10 C83.X), > 12 months pre-diagnosis baseline data with no anti-cancer treatments or other primary cancers, and >3 months follow-up data were required for inclusion. Treatments received in 3L, time to next therapy (TTNT) and % receiving subsequent treatments are described. Healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs while on treatment are reported on a per patient per month (PPPM) basis.

RESULTS: A total of 133 3L DLBCL patients met inclusion criteria with a median follow-up of 5.7 months. Median [IQR] patient age was 57 [50, 62] years and 59% were male. Commonly received 3L therapies were chemotherapy combination/monotherapy (20%), autologous stem cell transplant (20%), rituximab containing therapies (17%), radiotherapy combination (11%) and a multitude of other treatments and combinations. Median TTNT was 4.4 months and 30% of patients received a 4L, though the follow-up period was limited. As patients advanced from 1L to 3L, the proportion of patients with inpatient stays increased (32% to 43%, respectively). Median PPPM costs more than doubled from 1L to 3L, increasing as patients advance through lines of therapy with $33,669 PPPM in 1L, $39,300 in 2L and $72,224 in 3L. Costs were largely driven by inpatient and other medical costs.

CONCLUSIONS: Treatment options in 3L R/R DLBCL are heterogenous with no clear standard of care. As patients advanced to later lines, inpatient stays and PPPM costs increased, underscoring the need for novel therapies to improve care for R/R DLBCL patients.

Code

EE308

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas