ArticleHealth affairs (Project Hope)2023
Adopting Weight-Based Dosing With Pharmacy-Level Stewardship Strategies Could Reduce Cancer Drug Spending By Millions.
Article in Health affairs (Project Hope), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Morning versus afternoon administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2026Trial
- Structure-Guided In-Use Stability Assessment of Monoclonal Antibody Tislelizumab.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Observational
- Pan-Cancer Survival Impact of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in a National Healthcare System.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Pros and cons of subcutaneous (SC) versus intravenous (IV) administration of immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-small cell lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Projected environmental and public health benefits of extended-interval dosing: an analysis of pembrolizumab use in a US national health system.The Lancet. Oncology · 2024Article
- Extent and Mitigation of Financial Toxicity of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for the Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Immune checkpoint inhibitors, a class of drugs used in approximately forty unique cancer indications, are a sizable component of the economic burden of cancer care in the US. Instead of personalized weight-based dosing, immune checkpoint inhibitors are most commonly administered at "one-size-fits-all" flat doses that are higher than necessary for the vast majority of patients. We hypothesized that personalized weight-based dosing along with common stewardship efforts at the pharmacy level, such as dose rounding and vial sharing, would lead to reductions in immune checkpoint inhibitor use and lower spending. Using data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Medicare drug prices, we estimated reductions in immune checkpoint inhibitor use and spending that would be associated with pharmacy-level stewardship strategies, in a case-control simulation study of individual patient-level immune checkpoint inhibitor administration events. We identified baseline annual VHA spending for these drugs of approximately $537 million. Combining weight-based dosing, dose rounding, and pharmacy-level vial sharing would generate expected annual VHA health system savings of $74 million (13.7 percent). We conclude that adoption of pharmacologically justified immune checkpoint inhibitor stewardship measures would generate sizable reductions in spending for these drugs. Combining these operational innovations with value-based drug price negotiation enabled by recent policy changes may improve the long-term financial viability of cancer care in the US.
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.