ArticlePloS one
Assessing the transition from intravenous to subcutaneous delivery of rituximab: Benefits for payers, health care professionals, and patients with lymphoma.
Article in PloS one. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differences Between Intravenous and Subcutaneous Modes of Administration in Oncology from the Patient, Healthcare Provider, and Healthcare System Perspectives: A Systematic Review.Advances in therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Model-Informed Development of a Subcutaneous Formulation of Tislelizumab: Phase 1 Pharmacokinetics in Patients With Cancer.Clinical and translational science · 2026Trial
- Efficacy and safety of isatuximab subcutaneous plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: results of the Phase 2 study IZALCO.Blood cancer journal · 2025Trial
- Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, Bioavailability, and Immunogenicity of Obexelimab Following Subcutaneous Administration in Healthy Japanese and Non-Japanese Volunteers.Advances in therapy · 2025Trial
- Subcutaneously Administered Tislelizumab in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Pharmacokinetics and Safety Results from the BGB-A317-103 Phase I Study.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026Article
- Real-world evidence on the use of hospital resources for subcutaneous and intravenous trastuzumab administration in breast cancer patients at a referral public hospital in Mexico.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Article
- Review
- Societal Costs and Efficiency of Subcutaneous versus Intravenous Lecanemab in Early Alzheimer's Disease: A U.S. Cost Comparison Model.Neurology and therapy · 2025Article
- Development and Preclinical Testing of a Rapid, High-Volume, Auto-Injector for Subcutaneous Administration with Recombinant Human Hyaluronidase.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2025Article
- Patient Preference and Time Allocation Associated with Transition from Intravenous to Subcutaneous Administration of Natalizumab (Tysabri) in Patients with Relapsing Remitting MS - A Questionnaire Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
- 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
- Cost-Analysis of Subcutaneous vs Intravenous Administration of Natalizumab Based on Patient Care Pathway in Multiple Sclerosis in Spain.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subcutaneous (SC) administration of rituximab provides an opportunity for reduced patient treatment burden and increased healthcare efficiencies as an alternative to intravenous (IV) rituximab. There is minimal evidence comparing costs associated with SC and IV rituximab in a US setting. This research assessed the impact of transitioning patients from IV to SC rituximab for treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) from the US payer, provider, and patient perspective. We developed a model to estimate cost differences for transitioning 20% of a patient cohort from IV to SC rituximab. We included patients with incident diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, incident and recurrent follicular lymphoma, and incident and recurrent chronic lymphocytic leukemia. In the model, each patient received the same number of doses and that there was no difference in discontinuation between cohorts due to non-inferior efficacy and a similar safety profile. Model inputs were collected from published literature and publicly available data. Scenario analyses tested the impact of availability of low-cost biosimilars. In the base case (1,000,000 covered lives), we estimated a total of 157 patients, with 769 total drug administrations. A transition of 20% of patients from IV to SC was projected to generate $153,000 in payer savings, increase provider capacity by 270 hours, and free 470 hours of patient time. Scenario analyses suggest SC administration will be cost saving for payers even with a market where biosimilars approach 50% market share. A 20% transition to SC rituximab in a single cohort of patients has the potential to generate significant US health system value in the form of payer savings, increased practice capacity, and patient time.
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.