Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of abiraterone versus docetaxel in the treatment of metastatic hormone naive prostate cancer.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men in the US. Since 2015, landmark studies have demonstrated improved survival outcomes with the use of docetaxel (DCT) or abiraterone (AA) in addition to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the metastatic hormone-naïve setting. These treatment strategies have not been prospectively compared but have similar overall survival benefits despite differing mechanisms of action, toxicity, and cost. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis to provide insight into the value of AA vs. DCT in the first-line treatment of metastatic prostate cancer.

Materials and methods

We developed Markov models by using a US-payer perspective and a 3-year time horizon to estimate costs (2018 US$) and progression-free quality-adjusted life years (PF-QALYs) for ADT alone, DCT, and AA. Health states were defined as initial state, treatment states according to experience of an adverse event, and progressed disease/death. State transition probabilities were derived from rates for drug discontinuation, frequency of adverse events, disease progression, and death from the randomized phase III trials ChemoHormonal Therapy Versus Androgen Ablation Randomized Trial for Extensive Disease in Prostate Cancer (CHAARTED) and LATITUDE. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate model uncertainty.

Results

DCT resulted in an increase of 0.32 PF-QALYs and $16,100 in cost and AA resulted in an increase of 0.52 PF-QALYs and $215,800 in cost compared to ADT alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for DCT vs. ADT was $50,500/PF-QALY and for AA vs. DCT was $1,010,000/PF-QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/PF-QALY AA was highly unlikely to be cost-effective.

Conclusion

DCT is substantially more cost-effective than AA in the treatment of metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer.

SUBMITTER: Ramamurthy C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7751618 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of abiraterone versus docetaxel in the treatment of metastatic hormone naïve prostate cancer.

Ramamurthy Chethan C Handorf Elizabeth A EA Correa Andres F AF Beck J Robert JR Geynisman Daniel M DM

Urologic oncology 20190806 10

<h4>Purpose</h4>Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in men in the US. Since 2015, landmark studies have demonstrated improved survival outcomes with the use of docetaxel (DCT) or abiraterone (AA) in addition to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the metastatic hormone-naïve setting. These treatment strategies have not been prospectively compared but have similar overall survival benefits despite differing mechanisms of action, toxicity, and cost. We performed a cost-ef ...[more]

PMID: 31399302

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAddition of docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has been proved to be effective with an overall survival (OS) benefit in phase III clinical trials. The effectiveness of docetaxel with ADT in the general patient population remains unknown.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to report the clinical experience in mHSPC patients treated with 3rd-weekly docetaxel plus ADT in routine practice at two Danish institutions.Design setting and participantsA two-center retrospective study including consecutive mHSPC patients treated with 3rd-weekly docetaxel plus ADT was conducted.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisOutcomes of interest were OS, and biochemical and clinical progression-free survival.Results and limitationsA total of 173 consecutive patients with mHSPC who received docetaxel every 3rd week plus ADT between June 2015 and February 2018 were included. Most patients had high-volume disease (85%). All six planned docetaxel cycles were delivered in 149 cases (86%). Of the patients, 106 (61%) were alive at the last follow-up. At a median follow-up of 42 (37.8-58.6) mo, the median OS was 51.6 (41.5-56.3) mo. Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) developed in 46% within 1 yr, with a median time to CRPC of 15.6 (13.0-18.1) mo. Prostate-specific antigen nadir ≤0.2 ng/l was achieved in 15% of patients after 6 mo of ADT and in 19% after 12 mo.ConclusionsThe effect of docetaxel for mHSPC patients treated in routine practice appears comparable with the overall efficacy reported in the literature. Selection of patients will influence the results in clinical practice and clinical studies.Patient summaryIn this report, we looked at the clinical effectiveness of docetaxel combined with androgen deprivation therapy in men with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in a Danish population. We found the effect of docetaxel treatment for mHSPC in the general population to be comparable with the overall efficacy reported in published studies.

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess cabazitaxel versus docetaxel re-challenge for the treatment of metastatic castrate refractory prostate cancer (CRPC) patients previously treated with docetaxel at inception of primary hormone therapy.Patients and methodsThe CANTATA trial was a prospective, two-arm, open-label, phase II study conducted in eight UK centres. Patients over the age of 18, with histologically proven, metastatic prostate cancer who had been previously treated with up to 6 cycles of docetaxel as part of the STAMPEDE trial (or treated with the same drug outside of the trial at primary diagnosis) and had a performance status (PS) of 0-2, were eligible. Patients who progressed during primary treatment with docetaxel or had received prior systemic chemotherapy were excluded. Cabazitaxel (25 mg/m2) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2) was administered via intravenous infusion every 3 weeks with oral prednisolone (10 mg) for up to 10 cycles, until disease progression, death or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome was clinical progression-free survival (PFS) as defined by either date of pain progression, date of a cancer-related skeletal-related event, or date of death from any cause. Analyses were by intention to treat. EudraCT number: 2012-003835-40.ResultsBetween 7 March 2013 and 4 January 2016, 15 patients with a median age of 70 years (range 54-76) were recruited; seven received cabazitaxel, eight docetaxel. The study was halted due to slow accrual. The median clinical PFS time in the cabazitaxel group was 6.2 months compared with 8.4 for the docetaxel group (95% confidence intervals were not reached due to the small number of patients). A total of 13 serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionDue to the low number of patients recruited, meaningful comparisons could not be made. However, toxicity was in line with known outcomes for these agents, demonstrating it is feasible and safe to deliver chemotherapy to men relapsing with CRPC after upfront chemotherapy.

Project description:Two randomized clinical trials have demonstrated a survival advantage with enzalutamide over placebo in both docetaxel (D)-pretreated and D-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Cross-resistance between androgen receptor-directed therapies and taxanes has been suggested, possibly leading to lower efficacy of enzalutamide in the post-D setting.We aimed to examine the impact of prior D treatment on the clinical activity of enzalutamide in patients with mCRPC. We retrospectively reviewed an institutional database to identify men with mCRPC treated with standard-of-care enzalutamide. Patients were classified as D-naïve or D-pretreated. The efficacy end points were prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response rates (??50% PSA decline), time to PSA progression (TTPP) and clinical/radiographic progression-free survival (PFS) in response to enzalutamide. Differences between groups (D-naïve and D-pretreated) were assessed by univariate and multivariable analyses using logistic and Cox regression models.One-hundred-seven (107) consecutive patients were included: 60 were D-pretreated and 47 were D-naïve. PSA responses were 43.2% in D-naïve patients and 25.4% in D-pretreated patients (P?=?0.089). Median TTPP was 7.2 months (95% CI?=?4.5?-?17.2) in the D-naïve group versus 2.6 mo (95% CI?=?1.9?-?3.5) in the D-pretreated group (P?<?0.0001). Median PFS was not reached for D-naïve men and was 3.3 mo (95% CI?=?2.5?-?4.8) for D-pretreated men (P?<?0.0001). After adjusting for potential confounders including prior abiraterone use, differences remained statistically significant for TTPP (HR?=?2.32; 95% CI?=?1.19?-?4.50; P?=?0.013) and marginally significant for PFS (HR?=?1.90; 95% CI?=?0.94?-?3.84; P?=?0.073) in multivariable analyses. Among patients who achieved a PSA response to enzalutamide (n?=?34), results suggested a trend towards shorter duration of response in D-pretreated patients.The clinical activity of enzalutamide appears to be blunted in patients who have previously received docetaxel chemotherapy. These results support the concept of cross-resistance between these two agents.