Administrative data may reduce costs of economic analysis

The use of administrative data may improve the accuracy and reduce costs of oncology clinical trial economic analyses, according to a retrospective study.

“We investigated whether administrative data could improve the performance of cancer trial economic analysis,” Timothy P. Hanna, MD, MSc, PhD, of Queen’s University in Kingston, Ont., and colleagues wrote in the Journal of Oncology Practice.

The researchers linked clinical trial and health administrative data to evaluate the utility of administrative data in a group of 572 patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

The phase 3 trial assessed cetuximab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in these patients. The trial data set was used to obtain information related to resource utilization, such as hospitalization or treatment costs, in addition to clinical reports, such as vital status.

Several measures were estimated by the team, including the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and total costs.

After analysis, the researchers found that ICER measures were comparable with the use of administrative data versus trial data alone ($164,378 vs. $211,128 per QALY added up to last contact).

“Up to trial date of last contact, vital status was in agreement for more than 96% of patients,” Dr. Hanna and colleagues reported.

These findings highlight the potential utility of administrative data in reducing the costs of collecting applicable data from clinical trials alone.

“A harmonized approach has the potential to provide more complete information on clinical trial participants at reduced cost,” they concluded.

The study was funded by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and Queen’s University. The authors reported financial affiliations with Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, and UpToDate.

SOURCE: Hanna TP et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Jul 15. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00691.

The use of administrative data may improve the accuracy and reduce costs of oncology clinical trial economic analyses, according to a retrospective study.

“We investigated whether administrative data could improve the performance of cancer trial economic analysis,” Timothy P. Hanna, MD, MSc, PhD, of Queen’s University in Kingston, Ont., and colleagues wrote in the Journal of Oncology Practice.

The researchers linked clinical trial and health administrative data to evaluate the utility of administrative data in a group of 572 patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

The phase 3 trial assessed cetuximab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in these patients. The trial data set was used to obtain information related to resource utilization, such as hospitalization or treatment costs, in addition to clinical reports, such as vital status.

Several measures were estimated by the team, including the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and total costs.

After analysis, the researchers found that ICER measures were comparable with the use of administrative data versus trial data alone ($164,378 vs. $211,128 per QALY added up to last contact).

“Up to trial date of last contact, vital status was in agreement for more than 96% of patients,” Dr. Hanna and colleagues reported.

These findings highlight the potential utility of administrative data in reducing the costs of collecting applicable data from clinical trials alone.

“A harmonized approach has the potential to provide more complete information on clinical trial participants at reduced cost,” they concluded.

The study was funded by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and Queen’s University. The authors reported financial affiliations with Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, and UpToDate.

SOURCE: Hanna TP et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Jul 15. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00691.

The use of administrative data may improve the accuracy and reduce costs of oncology clinical trial economic analyses, according to a retrospective study.

“We investigated whether administrative data could improve the performance of cancer trial economic analysis,” Timothy P. Hanna, MD, MSc, PhD, of Queen’s University in Kingston, Ont., and colleagues wrote in the Journal of Oncology Practice.

The researchers linked clinical trial and health administrative data to evaluate the utility of administrative data in a group of 572 patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer.

The phase 3 trial assessed cetuximab plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in these patients. The trial data set was used to obtain information related to resource utilization, such as hospitalization or treatment costs, in addition to clinical reports, such as vital status.

Several measures were estimated by the team, including the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and total costs.

After analysis, the researchers found that ICER measures were comparable with the use of administrative data versus trial data alone ($164,378 vs. $211,128 per QALY added up to last contact).

“Up to trial date of last contact, vital status was in agreement for more than 96% of patients,” Dr. Hanna and colleagues reported.

These findings highlight the potential utility of administrative data in reducing the costs of collecting applicable data from clinical trials alone.

“A harmonized approach has the potential to provide more complete information on clinical trial participants at reduced cost,” they concluded.

The study was funded by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and Queen’s University. The authors reported financial affiliations with Amgen, Janssen, Novartis, and UpToDate.

SOURCE: Hanna TP et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Jul 15. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00691.