IMS Health, 1 IMS Drive, Plymouth Meeting, PA, 19462, USA,
Support Care Cancer. 2013 Nov;21(11):2957-65. doi: 10.1007/s00520-013-1830-7. Epub 2013 Jun 12.
PURPOSE: The erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), darbepoetin alfa (DA), and epoetin alfa (EA) differ with respect to dosing schedule in chemotherapy-induced anemia. DA can be administered less frequently than EA, which may increase synchronicity between chemotherapy and ESA schedules. This study compared DA and EA with respect to frequency of synchronization and frequencies of total and ESA healthcare visits in current clinical practice. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of ESA utilization during ESA episodes of care was conducted on all cancer patients identified in the SDI health oncology electronic medical records database who underwent chemotherapy and received ESA therapy from July 1, 2007 to March 31, 2010 (n = 6522 DA, n = 3,439 EA). RESULTS: The frequency of synchronization (chemotherapy and ESA therapy on the same day) was higher with DA (67 %) than EA (58 %) (p < 0.001). The odds that an ESA administration was synchronized with chemotherapy were higher with DA compared with EA (odds ratio = 1.46, 95 % CI: 1.37, 1.54). Compared with EA, DA patients had 2.3 fewer visits with an ESA administration (p < 0.001) and 3.0 fewer total visits (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients receiving EA, DA patients were more likely to have an ESA administration on the same healthcare visit as chemotherapy and had fewer visits for any cause or for ESA administration. These results suggest that through greater synchronization of ESA and chemotherapy administrations, DA may reduce patient and practice burden and healthcare utilization.
目的:促红细胞生成刺激剂(ESAs),达贝泊汀α(DA)和重组人红细胞生成素(EA)在化疗引起的贫血的给药方案方面有所不同。与 EA 相比,DA 的给药频率较低,这可能会增加化疗和 ESA 方案之间的同步性。本研究比较了 DA 和 EA 在当前临床实践中同步性的频率以及总就诊次数和 ESA 就诊次数的频率。
方法:对 SDI 健康肿瘤电子病历数据库中所有接受化疗并在 2007 年 7 月 1 日至 2010 年 3 月 31 日期间接受 ESA 治疗的癌症患者进行 ESA 治疗期间 ESA 护理的回顾性分析(n = 6522 例 DA,n = 3439 例 EA)。
结果:DA(67%)的同步频率(化疗和 ESA 治疗在同一天)高于 EA(58%)(p <0.001)。与 EA 相比,DA 治疗的 ESA 给药与化疗同步的可能性更高(优势比= 1.46,95%CI:1.37,1.54)。与 EA 相比,DA 患者的 ESA 给药次数减少了 2.3 次(p <0.001),总就诊次数减少了 3.0 次(p <0.001)。
结论:与接受 EA 治疗的患者相比,接受 DA 治疗的患者更有可能在与化疗相同的医疗就诊时接受 ESA 治疗,并且任何原因或 ESA 治疗就诊次数更少。这些结果表明,通过更大程度地同步 ESA 和化疗的管理,DA 可能会减轻患者和实践负担以及医疗保健的利用。
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2008-9-15
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2007-12-15
Future Oncol. 2011-4
Contemp Clin Trials. 2010-1-7