OBJECTIVES: As new cancer agents are developed, the importance of reducing the number of patient visits to the hospital for outpatient cancer therapy may be a key consideration for major stakeholders who make formulary or therapeutic decisions. The purpose of this study was to explore payer, hospital pharmacist and oncologist perceptions of the value of reducing the number of outpatient hospital visits associated with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) therapy.

METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted to gain insight from 22 stakeholders, including 11 US health-plan medical directors covering over 100 million lives, 7 pediatric oncologists who treat ALL and 4 hospital chief pharmacists. Medical directors, oncologists and pharmacists were asked to compare two long acting asparaginase drug profiles that can be used in ALL treatment: Standard-of-care asparaginase versus another asparaginase that may encompass fewer post-induction outpatient hospital visits. Comparisons were made across 4 dimensions: efficacy/safety, pharmacokinetics, shelf-life and number of outpatient visits.

RESULTS: On average, and assuming efficacy and safety were comparable between the two drug profiles, payer medical directors, pharmacists and pediatric oncologists rated lower frequency of visits for cancer therapy as the “most compelling” and shelf-life as the “least compelling” of the dimensions evaluated. Reasons for their ratings included potential for lower facility cost (payers) and improved clinic operation and patient therapy experience (oncologist).

CONCLUSIONS: In this survey of US health plan medical directors, hospital chief pharmacists and pediatric oncologists who treat ALL, reducing the number of outpatient hospital visits was identified as a compelling drug profile dimension. These findings support the concept that the number of outpatient hospital visits is a characteristic that may need to be considered when making decisions on formulary coverage and/or treatment.