CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞疗法在非肿瘤性疾病中的应用
Chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cell therapy in non-oncological diseases.
CAR-T(CAR-T)细胞在血液系统恶性肿瘤中的应用推动了这种免疫治疗形式的显著进展。
CELL INTELLIGENCE · 肿瘤细胞治疗研究
肿瘤细胞治疗研究
英文原题:Resource utilization for chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy versus autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with B cell lymphoma.
Resource utilization for chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy versus autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with B cell lymphoma.
分数与星级只用于站内排序 —— 不代表疗效、安全性或个人适用性。
靶向CD19的CAR-T 细胞已成为治疗复发/难治性(r/r)B细胞淋巴瘤(BCL)的高效方法。CAR-T 对这些患者的价值毋庸置疑,但单次生产成本较高,且其治疗相关辅助资源消耗所知甚少。
本研究比较r/r BCL患者CAR-T 与大剂量化疗后自体干细胞移植(ASCT)的资源使用和成本。研究根据标准操作流程,在ClipMed PPM软件中建立流程模型,涵盖维持或生成各治疗组件的全部活动和流程,并将其组合为完整治疗路径。该软件支持图形化呈现及使用标准化语言比较不同治疗路径。研究分析CAR-T 治疗(n=1,041项流程)和ASCT(n=1,535项流程)的详细过程,计算治疗阶段和人员的时间消耗,并使用财务控制数据估算流程成本。与ASCT相比,CAR-T 所需人员工时约少30%,主要因为化疗周期更少、门诊次数更少且住院时间更短。CAR-T 产品制造成本约高8倍,但整体治疗时间更短(30天比48天),直接人工成本和间接费用分别低40%和10%。不计高昂产品费用时,CAR-T 治疗r/r BCL比ASCT消耗更少医院资源。CAR-T 治疗住院天数较少、医院资源节约,对患者和医疗系统均有益。
CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) have emerged as a highly efficacious treatment for patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B cell lymphoma (BCL). The value of CAR-T for these patients is indisputable, but one-off production costs are high, and little is known about the ancillary resource consumption associated with CAR-T treatment.
Here, we compared the resource use and costs of CAR-T treatment with high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for patients with r/r BCL. Standard operating procedures were used to develop a process model in ClipMed PPM , which comprises all activities and processes to sustain or generate treatment components that together constitute a treatment path. The software allows a graphic representation and the use of standardized linguistic elements for comparison of different treatment paths. Detailed processes involved in CAR-T treatments (n = 1041 processes) and in ASCT (n = 1535) were analyzed for time consumption of treatment phases and personnel.
Process costs were calculated using financial controlling data. CAR-T treatment required ~ 30% less staff time than ASCT (primarily nursing staff) due to fewer chemotherapy cycles, less outpatient visits, and shorter hospital stays. For CAR-T, production costs were ~ 8 higher, but overall treatment time was shorter compared with ASCT (30 vs 48 days), and direct labor and overhead costs were 40% and 10% lower, respectively.
Excluding high product costs, CAR-T uses fewer hospital resources than ASCT for r/r BCL. Fewer hospital days for CAR-T compared to ASCT treatment and the conservation of hospital resources are beneficial to patients and the healthcare system.
在 PubMed 查看 → 出版商原文(DOI) 全文 PDF(PMC)· 可下载 治疗专题与资料阅读指南 资料来源与翻译说明 报告译文或资料问题 →
MEMBER ACCOUNT
登录成功会直接打开下一页。