Humanistic and economic impact of subcutaneous versus intravenous administration of oncology biologics

In this review article, published in the journal Future Oncology, researchers assess how the increased utility of antibody biologics for various malignancies may benefit patients and payers alike in the future.

Like 0 Comment

More oncology biologics are becoming available for subcutaneous administration and are expected to provide useful therapeutic options. In this review article, researchers from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (MA, USA), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (NY, USA),University of Alabama at Birmingham (AL, USA) and Pfizer (CA and NY, USA) have evaluated evidence published in the past 5 years and assessed the humanistic and economic impact of subcutaneous versus intravenous administration of approved cancer therapies to identify outcomes favoring either administration route.

The evaluated publications focused predominantly on healthcare resource utilization and economic outcomes, demonstrating resource and cost savings with subcutaneous administration. Patients reported a better health-related quality of life and preference for subcutaneous formulations. Time-and-motion study analyses confirmed the convenience of subcutaneous administration. These findings suggest that future availability of subcutaneous oncology biologics, especially anti-PD-1/PD-ligand 1 antibodies due to their increased utility in various malignancies, may be beneficial for patients, healthcare providers and payers.

Read the full open access article in Future Oncology now>>

Go to the profile of Future Oncology

Future Oncology

Journal, Future Medicine

The latest advances in basic, translational and clinical oncology | MEDLINE-indexed journal | IF 2.369 | Published by Future Science Group
7 Contributions
0 Following

No comments yet.