{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026436197254702594, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013726487036095577, 'mean_word_length': 5.473684210526316, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost Comparison of Recombinant Human Erythropoietin and Blood Transfusion in Cancer Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost of recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) with that of blood transfusion in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia from a healthcare system perspective. DESIGN: A decision analytic model. Baseline estimates were obtained from a review of clinical trials data and economic evaluation studies. SUBJECTS: Secondary data analyses of patients with advanced malignancies, excluding hematologic malignancies and metastasized solid tumors. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received either leukocyte-depleted packed red blood cells (PRBCs) or rHuEPO 150 units/kg sc three times per week for 6 months (24 wk). After 6 weeks, if rHuEPO recipients did not display a response, they received rHuEPO 300 units/kg sc three times weekly for the duration of therapy. If rHuEPO recipients still exhibited no response, they were given blood transfusions. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: For a treatment period of 24 weeks, approximately 64% of rHuEPO recipients responded at an average expected cost of $12 971 per patient. One hundred percent of transfusion recipients responded at a cost of $4481; this resulted in a cost savings of $8490. Variation of response rates for rHuEPO or PRBCs did not appreciably lower costs. Lower rHuEPO dosages and higher numbers of transfused units of PRBCs yielded approximately equivalent costs; however, these strategies may not be clinically prudent. CONCLUSIONS: From a healthcare system cost and outcome perspective, blood transfusion is the preferred strategy for chemotherapy-induced anemia. However, rHuEPO may be considered an effective blood-sparing alternative for patients with non-stem cell disorders. Future cost-effectiveness analyses are needed to assess more completely both the clinical and quality-of-life benefits rHuEPO may contribute to individual patients' lives and to society overall.