Our Mission
PeopleBeatingCancer supports an evidence-based integrative approach to cancer care. For most newly diagnosed patients, FDA-approved therapies form the foundation of treatment, while evidence-based complementary therapies may help reduce side effects and improve survivorship.
Click the orange button to the right to learn more.
- You are here:
- Home »
- Blog »
- Multiple Myeloma »
- Myeloma Side Effects are Expensive!
Myeloma Side Effects are Expensive!
Myeloma side effects are expensive. But what can a newly diagnosed MM patient do about it? I mean, side effects are expected, aren’t they?
Yes and no. Let me explain.
First and foremost, the study below references cancers other than MM. Therefore, it is impossible to compare apples to apples. The main benefit of the study is to make MM patients and survivors aware of the basic issues. Myeloma side effects are expensive!
I linked the video below mainly because it talks about the expense of chemo AND the expense of chemo side effects. Parris is a prostate cancer survivor so the content doesn’t really pertain to MM patients. But again, the video introduces the newly diagnosed MM patient to the main issues of their treatments.
What Does Chemo Cost?
What can the newly diagnosed MM patient do about the high cost of MM side effects? Consider a low-dose approach to managing your MM. Consider the “control” side of the cure vs. control debate.
Less chemotherapy over the course of your life as a MM patient means less toxicity which means a reduced risk of side effects. A reduced risk of side effects means fewer side effects which means less treatment costs of those side effects.
Yes, I am making generalizations here. But I think my generalizations are legit. Let me know what you think. Email me at David.PeopleBeatingCancer@gmail.com and tell me what you think.
David Emerson
- MM Survivor
- MM Cancer Coach
- Director PeopleBeatingCancer
Costs of Cancer Drug-Related AEs Are Often Underestimated, Data Suggest
The actual costs of adverse events were significantly higher than the estimates in cost-effectiveness analyses, with a median difference of $17,201.
The costs of adverse events (AEs) from cancer drugs are consistently underestimated, according to findings published in JAMA Network Open.
Researchers conducted a systematic review of claims-based studies focused on AE-related costs of cancer treatment. The researchers compared estimates from cost-effectiveness analyses to actual costs and analyzed the impact of replacing the estimates with actual values for incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) at thresholds of $100,000 and $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).
The analysis included 11 claims-based studies encompassing 34,022 patients and 102 cost-effectiveness analyses. The researchers evaluated AEs related to treatment of
- advanced non-small cell lung cancer,
- advanced melanoma,
- unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma,
- metastatic breast cancer,
- advanced renal cell carcinoma,
- resectable colorectal cancer,
- and nonmetastatic prostate cancer.
The researchers found that the actual costs of AEs were significantly higher than the estimates in cost-effectiveness analyses, with a median difference of $17,201 (P =.03). Adjusting AE costs from the estimates to the actual costs led to an ICER change of $42,656 per QALY and changed the cost-effectiveness conclusions in 8 of 17 cases (47.1%).
The researchers noted that some of the differences between estimates and actual costs may be due to the different types of AE costs included in cost-effectiveness analyses. For instance, 85.3% of cost-effectiveness analyses did not consider post-progression AE costs, 87.3% did not account for AEs interrupting treatment or leading to dose reductions, and 82.8% only accounted for AEs occurring once during the first treatment cycle.
“[M]any studies did not specify AE types, focused on severe AEs, and ignored postprogression costs,” the researchers wrote. “Few considered dose modifications, treatment interruptions, or survival impacts. Most assumed AEs occurred only in the first treatment cycle, used inconsistent methods for estimating incidence and costs, and had substantial variability in unit AE costs. These findings highlight the need to improve AE cost quantification in oncology CEAs [cost-effectiveness analyses] and standardize methods for more accurate evaluations.”
Disclosures: This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China. The study authors reported having no conflicts of interest. Please see the original reference for complete disclosures.
Myeloma side effects are expensive Myeloma side effects are expensive