ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2021
Payer Perspectives on Intravenous versus Subcutaneous Administration of Drugs.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Analyzing the impact of subcutaneous injection needle, device, and administration characteristics on patient pain, anxiety, and safety: a systematic literature review.Drug delivery · 2026Pooled it
- Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, Bioavailability, and Immunogenicity of Obexelimab Following Subcutaneous Administration in Healthy Japanese and Non-Japanese Volunteers.Advances in therapy · 2025Trial
- Pozelimab for CHAPLE disease: results from in-trial interviews and clinical outcome assessments.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Trial
- Coverage Generosity of Novel Antirheumatic Drugs in Medicare Advantage and Stand-Alone Part D Plans.Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Pembrolizumab vs. chemotherapy in the first-line setting of PD-L1 ≥ 50% metastatic non-small cell lung cancer: a real-world cost-effectiveness analysis.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Review
- Article
- Design research on a smart infusion device to reduce medical workload and enhance patient safety.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Patient Experience and Improvement Opportunities in Self-Administered, Large-Volume Subcutaneous Infusions at Home.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- Key characteristics of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies and clinical implications for multiple sclerosis treatment.Journal of neurology · 2024Review
- The burden of systemic therapy administration route in treating HER2-positive breast cancer (for patients, healthcare professionals, and healthcare system): a systematic literature review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Review
- Practice efficiency and total cost of care with bispecifics and CAR-T in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: an institutional perspective.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Healthcare Provider Administration of Biologics for Patients with Plaque Psoriasis: Literature Review and Clinical Considerations.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023Review
- Factors Associated with Biosimilar Exclusions and Step Therapy Restrictions Among US Commercial Health Plans.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2023Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought increased attention to vulnerable populations such as older or immunocompromised patients and heightened the focus on alternatives to intravenous (IV) formulations, particularly those that may be administered in a non-clinical setting. Among these alternative formulations are subcutaneous (SC) injections, which comprise an increasing share of commercialized and pipeline therapies. While much has been published about the benefits and limitations of IV versus SC administration to patients and health systems, less attention has been given to payer considerations regarding these routes of administration. Accordingly, this article provides payer perspectives on some of the key differences between IV and SC administration as they relate to management and billing, cost, treatment adherence and safety, and patient preference and quality of life. The benefits and limitations of these drug administration routes to key healthcare stakeholders-namely patients, physicians, and payers-are also discussed. Considerations of relevance are highlighted, including the potential for misalignment of stakeholder interests and countervailing factors that may impact decision-making about IV and SC formulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.