Search

Objective: Patients included in MAINRITSAN2 trial received either an individually tailored or a fixed-schedule therapy with rituximab as maintenance treatment of antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody associated vasculitides. The aim of this study was to compare the real-world costs of both arms. Method: We performed a cost-minimization analysis over an 18-month time period, estimating direct costs –drug acquisition, preparation, administration and monitoring costs– from the health system perspective. We conducted a number of additional sensitivity analyses with different assumptions for unit costs, with further scenarios including the interquartile range of the tailored-infusion group results, different number of monitoring visits for fixed-schedule regimen and different number of reported severe adverse events. A cost- effectiveness analysis was conducted as a sensitivity analysis using the absolute difference in the relapse rate and its confidence interval. Results: The individually tailored maintenance therapy with rituximab was shown to be a cost-saving treatment compared to the fixed-schedule therapy (6,049 euros vs. 7,850 euros). Savings resulted primarily from lower drug acquisition costs (2,861 vs. 4,768 euros) and lower preparation and administration costs (892 vs. 1,486 euros), due to the lower number of infusions per patient in the tailored-infusion regimen. The tailoredinfusion regimen presented higher monitoring costs (2,296 vs. 1,596 euros). This result was replicated in all assumptions considered in the sensitivity analysis of cost-minimization approach. Conclusions: From the perspective of the health system, the tailoredtherapy regimen seems to be the preferable option in terms of direct costs. Further studies assessing all the effects and costs associated to vasculitides maintenance treatment with rituximab are needed to support clinical management and healthcare planning.

The addition of a fourth year to the hospital pharmacy residency program has allowed trainees to rotate through various inpatient clinical units where they can, under the supervision of a specialist pharmacist, work shoulder to shoulder with other healthcare providers to ensure that patients receive the care they need. In addition to sharing their pharmacotherapeutic and pharmacokinetic knowledge (among others) with their colleagues, hospital pharmacists can and should contribute with their expertise in the areas of drug evaluation, selection and positioning. As no other healthcare professional masters like a pharmacist the intricacies of treatment efficacy or effectiveness, or of therapeutic safety, conveying this knowledge is yet another of the many clinical activities a hospital pharmacist must perform as a member of a multidisciplinary team, while assisting fellow-team members in deciding what medications are best suited to each patient. Both the public authorities and the pharmaceutical profession as a whole should make sure the pharmacist’s role is rightfully valued and given the recognition it deserves.