MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156218709 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v74i2.3108

Effect on Patients’ Outcomes of a Change to Biosimilar Filgrastim Product in Autologous Stem Cell Mobilization

2021· article· en· W3156218709 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jennifer Fenna, Micheal Guirguis, Caroline Ibrahim, Neeta Shirvaikar, Irwindeep Sandhu, Sunita Ghosh, Melissa Jenkins

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFilgrastimBiosimilarMedicineGranulocyte colony-stimulating factorInternal medicineAutologous stem-cell transplantationFormularyOncologyPharmacologyChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Following addition of a biosimilar filgrastim product to the formulary, sites in the authors’ provincial health authority transitioned from using the originator filgrastim to the biosimilar for autologous stem cell mobilization. Objective: To assess the effect on patient outcomes of a universal change to use of the biosimilar filgrastim in stem cell mobilization. Methods: This retrospective pre–post study included patients undergoing autologous stem cell mobilization at 2 cancer hospitals in Alberta, Canada, between July 1, 2018, and November 30, 2019. Clinical outcomes were investigated for patients treated with a granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (biosimilar or originator product) for mobilization before stem cell transplant, approximately 6 months before and after the defined date of product change. Results: In total, 102 patients were treated with the originator product and 101 patients with the biosimilar. Effectiveness was similar between the originator and biosimilar products, with 98% successful harvest of stem cells in all patients treated. Independent t tests showed no statistically significant differences between patients receiving the originator and those receiving the biosimilar in terms of time from mobilization to collection (difference of means –0.9 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] –2.12 to 0.32), time for neutrophil engraftment (difference of means 0 days, 95% CI –0.36 to 0.36), time for platelet engraftment (difference of means 1 day, 95% CI –0.55 to 2.55), average length of stay (difference of means –0.7 day, 95% CI –2.71 to 1.31), and CD34+ value (difference of means –1 × 106/kg body weight, 95% CI –2.11 to 0.11). A 98% rate of conversion to use of the biosimilar filgrastim was achieved, with an estimated annual drug-cost saving of $67 500. Conclusions: In this pre–post study, changing to the biosimilar product from the originator maintained clinical effectiveness outcomes while decreasing overall drug expenditures. A well-planned change to the biosimilar product, executed in conjunction with clinician consultation and monitoring of effectiveness outcomes, can ensure appropriate patient therapy while significantly improving the uptake of biosimilars and decreasing expenditures for biologic drugs. RÉSUMÉ Contexte : À la suite de l’ajout d’un produit filgrastim biosimilaire à la liste des médicaments, les sites relevant de l’autorité sanitaire provinciale des auteurs sont passés de l’utilisation du filgrastim princeps à la version générique pour la mobilisation des cellules souches autologues. Objectif : Évaluer l’effet sur les résultats des patients d’un changement généralisé visant à utiliser le filgrastim générique pour la mobilisation des cellules souches. Méthodes : Cette étude rétrospective pré-post comprenait des patients soumis à une mobilisation des cellules souches autologues dans deux hôpitaux de cancérologie en Alberta (Canada) entre le 1er juillet 2018 et le 30 novembre 2019. L’examen des résultats cliniques des patients traités à l’aide d’un facteur stimulant les colonies de granulocytes (G-CSF) (générique ou princeps) pour une mobilisation avant la greffe de cellules souches a eu lieu environ six mois avant et après la date du changement de produit. Résultats : Au total, 102 patients ont été traités à l’aide du produit princeps et 101 patients à l’aide du générique. Les deux produits présentaient une efficacité similaire, et 98 % de réussite dans la récolte de cellules souches chez tous les patients traités. Des tests t indépendants n’ont montré aucune différence statistique significative entre les patients recevant le princeps et ceux recevant le biosimilaire en termes de temps allant de la mobilisation à la collecte (différence des moyennes –0,9 jour, intervalle de confiance [IC] 95 % –2,12 à 0,32); temps de la prise de la greffe neutrophile (différence des moyennes 0 jour, IC 95 % –0,36 à 0,36); temps de la prise de la greffe des plaquettes (différence des moyennes 1 jour, IC 95 % –0,55 à 2,55); durée moyenne du séjour (différence des moyennes –0,7 jour, IC 95 % –2,71 à 1,31) et valeur CD34+ (différence des moyennes –1 × 106/kg masse corporelle, IC 95 % –2,11 à 0,11). Un taux de conversion de 98 % visant à utiliser le filgrastim générique a été atteint, avec une estimation des économies annuelles sur le coût des médicaments de 67 500 $. Conclusions : Dans cette étude pré-post, le passage du produit princeps au générique a préservé l’efficacité des résultats cliniques, tout en diminuant les dépenses générales liées au médicament. Un changement bien programmé pour passer au produit générique, mené conjointement avec la consultation d’un clinicien et un contrôle des résultats d’efficacité, peut assurer une thérapie du patient appropriée tout en améliorant grandement la prise de produits génériques et en diminuant les dépenses associées aux médicaments biologiques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicBiosimilars and Bioanalytical MethodsFrench-language works237,207