HOSPITAL RESOURCE OPTIMIZATION WITH SUBCUTANEOUS IMMUNOTHERAPY IN LUNG CANCER: A REAL-WORLD ORGANIZATIONAL AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Author(s)
Léopoldine du Manoir de Juaye, PharmD1, Nicolas Cormier, PharmD2, Christos CHOUAID, PhD3, Laura CORDURIE, Msc4, Chloe Gerves-Pinquie, PhD5, Aurélie de Lehvenfehlt, Msc6.
1Roche pharma SAS, Boulogne-Billancourt cedex, France, 2CHU de Nantes, Nantes, France, 3CHI Creteil France, Boulogne-Billancourt, France, 4IQVIA OPERATIONS FRANCE SAS, Courbevoie, France, 5IQVIA Opérations France, La defense, France, 6Roche SAS, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
1Roche pharma SAS, Boulogne-Billancourt cedex, France, 2CHU de Nantes, Nantes, France, 3CHI Creteil France, Boulogne-Billancourt, France, 4IQVIA OPERATIONS FRANCE SAS, Courbevoie, France, 5IQVIA Opérations France, La defense, France, 6Roche SAS, Boulogne-Billancourt, France.
OBJECTIVES: As the growing use of oncology immunotherapies and rising cancer incidence create organizational challenges for hospitals, this study aims to assess the organizational and economic impacts of atezolizumab, the first subcutaneous (SC) lung cancer immunotherapy, versus standard intravenous (IV) administration within hospital pharmacies and day hospitals.
METHODS: This two‑part study included: (1) a 2025 retrospective observational study across 10 hospitals in France, comprising qualitative interviews and quantitative data collection; and (2) an organizational impact model projecting the effects of 50% SC adoption in a hypothetical hospital. Data were collected from day‑hospital units and hospital pharmacy teams for three pulmonary cancer indications of atezolizumab, comparing intravenous immunotherapies with the subcutaneous formulation.
RESULTS: Compared with IV administration, SC formulation reduced mean pharmacy preparation time per dose by 2.4 minutes (−15.5%), nurse active time by 17.6 minutes (−35.9%), and chair time by 54.4 minutes (−48.7%). Greater gains occurred in centers with optimized workflows. In the 50% SC‑adoption scenario, annual savings amounted to 148.8 hours of nursing time, 468 hours of chair time, and 18.2 hours of pharmacy preparation time. This enables 402 additional SC immunotherapy sessions per year, equivalent to treating 25 additional patients. Annual consumables savings reached €6,179, with a total projected economic benefit of €192,058 for the hospital.
The SC formulation helps alleviate operational burden in non-optimized centers, while further enhancing efficiency potential in highly optimized settings. Given its characteristics, it could also be readily integrated into France’s expanding immunotherapy home‑hospitalization programs.
CONCLUSIONS: SC immunotherapy provides critical time savings, supporting increased capacity in oncology service. It offers a scalable solution to expand care without additional infrastructure.
METHODS: This two‑part study included: (1) a 2025 retrospective observational study across 10 hospitals in France, comprising qualitative interviews and quantitative data collection; and (2) an organizational impact model projecting the effects of 50% SC adoption in a hypothetical hospital. Data were collected from day‑hospital units and hospital pharmacy teams for three pulmonary cancer indications of atezolizumab, comparing intravenous immunotherapies with the subcutaneous formulation.
RESULTS: Compared with IV administration, SC formulation reduced mean pharmacy preparation time per dose by 2.4 minutes (−15.5%), nurse active time by 17.6 minutes (−35.9%), and chair time by 54.4 minutes (−48.7%). Greater gains occurred in centers with optimized workflows. In the 50% SC‑adoption scenario, annual savings amounted to 148.8 hours of nursing time, 468 hours of chair time, and 18.2 hours of pharmacy preparation time. This enables 402 additional SC immunotherapy sessions per year, equivalent to treating 25 additional patients. Annual consumables savings reached €6,179, with a total projected economic benefit of €192,058 for the hospital.
The SC formulation helps alleviate operational burden in non-optimized centers, while further enhancing efficiency potential in highly optimized settings. Given its characteristics, it could also be readily integrated into France’s expanding immunotherapy home‑hospitalization programs.
CONCLUSIONS: SC immunotherapy provides critical time savings, supporting increased capacity in oncology service. It offers a scalable solution to expand care without additional infrastructure.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-11, ISPOR Europe 2026, Vienna, Austria
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue 12S
Code
OP2
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Health Service Delivery & Process of Care, Organizational Practices
Disease
Oncology, Respiratory-Related Disorders (Allergy, Asthma, Smoking, Other Respiratory)