The Effects of Adverse Events and Associated Costs on Value-Based Care for Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Document Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

1-1-2024

Journal

Journal of health economics and outcomes research

Volume

11

Issue

2

DOI

10.36469/001c.124367

Keywords

Medicare; adverse events; metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; pancreatic cancer; total cost of care; value-based care

Abstract

Rising oncology healthcare costs have led to value-based care reimbursement models that coordinate care and improve quality while reducing overall spending. These models are increasingly important for traditional Medicare and other payers. To compare the incidence of adverse events (AEs), AE-associated excess costs, and total cost of care (TCOC) of 3 cohorts receiving first-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC). We conducted a retrospective analysis of administrative claims data from 2018 to 2022 using the Medicare 100% Research Identifiable Files. We examined 3 cohorts receiving mPDAC treatment: FOLFIRINOX (FFX) (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin, 5-FU bolus and infusion); modified FFX, (5-FU infusion only); and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (gem/abrax). We compared the incidence of clinically significant AEs, TCOC, components of TCOC, and costs related to AEs/treatment toxicity. Patient AE rates ranged from 6.2% to 51.7%. AEs occurred more frequently in patients receiving FFX with all 4 components. Patients receiving brand name gem/abrax had lower rates of febrile neutropenia (6.2%) and neutropenia (22.2%) than those receiving FFX with no 5-FU bolus (febrile neutropenia, 9.9%; neutropenia, 36.9%) and FFX with all 4 components (febrile neutropenia, 6.9%; neutropenia, 30.4%). Rates of most nonhematologic AEs were higher in patients receiving FFX with all 4 components, with diarrhea occurring in 28.3%, abdominal pain in 31.5%, and nausea/vomiting in 41.5% of patients. TCOC was lower in the gem/abrax cohort: 6995) and FFX with all 4 components ( 5993 per administration, while the development of any studied nonhematological AE was associated with a mean per-administration excess cost of $3665. Treatment decisions intended to minimize chemotherapy costs may lead to suboptimal decisions if the goal is to reduce TCOC. Our research suggests FFX is more costly than gem/abrax (TCOC per administration). Patients receiving gem/abrax were older and had higher baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index scores; however, other factors may be important in driving cost differences. Irrespective of drug cost, chemotherapy leading to a significant increase in AEs is associated with higher TCOC.

Department

Medicine

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS