A Systematic Review of Time and Resource Use Costs of Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Administration of Oncology Biologics in a Hospital Setting.

backgroundThe introduction of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted treatment options, including dual HER2 blockade, has improved the prognosis for patients with HER2-positive breast cancer (BC) substantially. However, most of these treatments are administered via the intravenous (IV) route, which can present many challenges, such as long infusion and observation times, issues associated with repeated IV access, and increased strain on time and resources of medical centers and healthcare professionals. A fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous (SC) injection (pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf (PHESGO

objectivesThis systematic literature review was performed to identify evidence relating to time/resource use and resulting cost differences between SC and IV administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting, and, ultimately, to inform economic modeling and associated health technology assessment of PH FDC SC.

methodsElectronic databases (Embase, MEDLINE, and EconLit) were searched on 9 April 2020. Additional hand searches were performed to identify publications not captured in the electronic database search. Publication screening and data extraction (study characteristics, participants, interventions, costs, and time/resource use) were carried out per the standard Cochrane review methodology. The quality of economic evidence of cost analyses was assessed using the 36-item checklist of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Single Technology Appraisal Specification for submission of evidence (January 2015).

resultsThe database search identified 2,740 records, of which 237 underwent full text screening. Full text screening, prioritization of publications about patients with a cancer diagnosis, and the addition of four citations identified during the hand search resulted in 72 final included publications, relating to 71 unique studies. This included 40 publications that described the time/resource use and/or costs associated with SC versus IV trastuzumab administration for the treatment of HER2-positive BC, and 28 publications that described time/resource use and/or costs associated with rituximab SC versus IV administration for the treatment of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma/follicular lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The majority of publications showed substantial time savings for preparation and administration of SC versus IV therapy, and cost savings associated with reductions in healthcare professional time and resource use for SC administration. LIMITATIONS: There was a lack of consensus between publications regarding time and cost measurements. In addition, the search was limited to publications related to anticancer drugs; the majority of the studies included were performed in European countries. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This review indicated a substantial body of evidence showing time/resource and cost savings of SC versus IV administration of oncology biologics in a hospital setting, which can be used to inform economic evaluations of PH FDC SC.