Supplementary data: Real-world use of inotuzumab ozogamicinis associated with lower health care costs than blinatumomab in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the first relapsed/refractory setting

These are peer-reviewed supplementary tables for the article 'Real-world use of inotuzumab ozogamicinis associated with lower health care costs than blinatumomab in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the first relapsed/refractory setting' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.Supplementary Table 1: Unweighted baseline demographic characteristics among patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in first relapsed/refractory settingSupplementary Table 2: Inverse probability treatment weighted baseline comorbidities for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia receiving InO and Blina in the first relapsed/refractory settingAim: To compare all-cause and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL)-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients receiving inotuzumab ozogamicin (InO) and blinatumomab (Blina) for ALL in the first relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. Patients & methods: We studied retrospective claims for adult commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees with ALL receiving InO (n = 29) or Blina (n = 23) from 1 January 2015 to 16 February 2021. Mean per-patient-per-month (PPPM) HCRU and total costs were described and multivariable-adjusted PPPM total all-cause and ALL-related predicted costs were calculated. Results: Mean monthly ALL-related hospitalizations were the same for patients receiving InO and Blina (PPPM = 0.8 stays); however, the length of ALL-related hospital stay was almost twice as long among patients receiving Blina versus InO (ALL-related: InO = 7.6 days; Blina = 14.1 days; p = 0.346). In multivariable models, total ALL-related costs were 43% lower for InO compared with Blina (PPPM costs: InO = $93,767; Blina = $163,470; p = 0.021). Conclusion: In the first R/R setting, patients who used InO had significantly lower all-cause and ALL-related costs compared with patients who used Blina, in part driven by hospitalization patterns.

本数据集为发表于《比较疗效研究杂志》的论文《Inotuzumab ozogamicin在急性淋巴细胞白血病首次复发/难治性治疗中的应用与Blinatumomab相比，其医疗保健成本更低》的同行评审补充表格。补充表格1：首次复发/难治性治疗中急性淋巴细胞白血病患者的未加权基线人口统计学特征；补充表格2：首次复发/难治性治疗中接受InO和Blina治疗的急性淋巴细胞白血病患者的逆概率治疗加权基线合并症。研究目的：比较接受Inotuzumab ozogamicin（InO）和blinatumomab（Blina）治疗急性淋巴细胞白血病（ALL）的首次复发/难治性（R/R）设置患者之间的全因和ALL相关医疗保健资源利用（HCRU）及成本。研究对象与方法：我们研究了2015年1月1日至2021年2月16日期间，患有ALL并接受InO（n = 29）或Blina（n = 23）的成人商业医疗保险和Medicare Advantage参保人的回顾性索赔数据。描述了每患者每月（PPPM）HCRU和总成本，并计算了多变量调整后的PPPM总全因和ALL相关预测成本。研究结果：接受InO和Blina治疗的患者，其平均每月ALL相关住院次数相同（PPPM = 0.8次）；然而，接受Blina治疗的患者与接受InO治疗的患者相比，ALL相关住院时间几乎翻倍（ALL相关：InO = 7.6天；Blina = 14.1天；p = 0.346）。在多变量模型中，InO的总ALL相关成本比Blina低43%（PPPM成本：InO = $93,767；Blina = $163,470；p = 0.021）。研究结论：在首次R/R设置中，使用InO的患者与使用Blina的患者相比，全因和ALL相关成本显著降低，部分原因在于住院模式。