Practice efficiency of treatment with epcoritamab versus glofitamab in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Abstract

e18919 Background: Bispecific antibodies are an emerging class of immunotherapies with demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Since epcoritamab is administered subcutaneously, it provides an opportunity for reduced healthcare provider (HCP) and patient burden compared to intravenous (IV) glofitamab. This study assessed HCP and chair time saved treating R/R DLBCL patients with epcoritamab versus glofitamab. Methods: An efficiency model was developed to comprehensively capture time and resources utilized in the administration of epcoritamab and glofitamab from the perspective of institutional decision makers in the United States. The model was informed by the administration process and dosing schedules outlined in the pivotal publications as well as published literature examining HCP’s tasks and the time required to complete these tasks. A 6-month time horizon as was adopted as the base case due to its relevance in the Enhancing Oncology Model, and scenario analyses were performed examining various time horizons. Results: Treating patients with SC epcoritamab compared to IV glofitamab was estimated to reduce HCP time by 29% (45.4 hours for 19 doses of epcoritamab vs. 63.9 hours for 10 doses of glofitamab) and chair time by 38% (55.8 vs. 90.6 hours) per patient over a 6-month time horizon. Time saved for epcoritamab was mainly driven by glofitamab’s infusion time and required pre-treatment with obinutuzumab. For 100 hypothetical patients treated with SC epcoritamab vs. IV glofitamab, a savings of 3,478 chair hours was generated, which could free up capacity to treat 62 additional patients. In the scenario analyses examining different time horizons, the capacity savings advantage of epcoritamab over glofitamab remained. Conclusions: In this model, the use of SC epcoritamab improved practice efficiency compared to IV glofitamab. For institutional decision makers, reduced chair time may increase the total number of treated patients and lead to reduced waiting lists.