The mpn Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the mpn Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The mpn and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The MPN Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by AOP Health and GSK, and supported through an educational grant from Bristol Myers Squibb. The funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out more
Create an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View mpn content recommended for you
Treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization in ruxolitinib-treated patients with MF stratified by anemia status: A real-world analysis
|
The clinical and economic burden of patients with MF and anemia is high. Liu et al.1 published a real-world retrospective study comparing the healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), healthcare costs, and treatment patterns in ruxolitinib-treated patients with MF with and without anemia in Annals of Hematology.1 The analysis utilized healthcare claims data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database for 481 patients (anemic, n = 257; non-anemic, n = 224) diagnosed with primary or secondary MF with ≥1 ruxolitinib claim at or after MF diagnosis between January 2011 and December 2022.1 The median follow-up was 2 years (range, 0.2–9.1 years).1 |
| Key learnings |
| Anemic patients had a higher median number of inpatient admissions (0.3 vs 0.0; p < 0.001) and emergency department visits (0.4 vs 0.0; p < 0.010) compared to non-anemic patients. |
|
Anemic patients had numerically higher median annual total medical costs ($44,830 vs $12,017; p = 0.638) and healthcare costs ($198,491 vs $170,419; p = 0.549), but significantly lower median total pharmacy costs compared to non-anemic patients ($129,381 vs $136,686; p < 0.050). |
| Discontinuation rates were higher and median time to ruxolitinib discontinuation was ~1 year shorter among anemic vs non-anemic patients (14.1 months vs 23.8 months; p < 0.010). |
|
This analysis shows that anemic patients with MF have higher HCRU vs non-anemic patients, suggesting a need for alternative treatments for these patients to reduce medical resource burden. An investigation of baseline comorbidities and other confounders affecting HCRU and costs may offer further insights. |
Abbreviations: HCRU, healthcare resource utilization; MF, myelofibrosis.
References
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:
The content was clear and easy to understand
The content addressed the learning objectives
The content was relevant to my practice
I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content