Dataset Information

Survival outcomes in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Evaluation of the comparative effectiveness of enzalutamide and abiraterone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is limited to meta-analyses of randomized trials that exclude patients with significant comorbidities. We evaluated overall survival (OS) in patients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate (abiraterone) in a real-world single payer setting.

Methods

A retrospective analysis (4/1/2014-3/31/2018) of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database was conducted. Patients with mCRPC had ≥1 pharmacy claim for enzalutamide or abiraterone (first claim date = index date) following disease progression on surgical/medical castration, without chemotherapy <12 months prior to index date. Patients had continuous VHA enrollment for ≥12 months pre-index date and were followed until death, disenrollment, or end of study. Kaplan-Meier analysis and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models examined the OS treatment effect.

Results

Patients with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC (N = 3174; enzalutamide, n = 1229; abiraterone, n = 1945) had mean ages of 74 and 73 years, respectively. Median follow-up was 18.27 and 19.07 months with enzalutamide and abiraterone, respectively. Enzalutamide-treated patients had longer median treatment duration than abiraterone-treated patients (9.93 vs 8.47 months, respectively, p = 0.0008). After baseline comorbidity adjustment, enzalutamide-treated patients had a 16% reduced risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94; p = 0.0012). For patients who remained on first line-therapy only, enzalutamide-treated patients had improved OS versus abiraterone-treated patients (HR = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.82). Enzalutamide-treated patients who crossed over to abiraterone had a comparable risk of death versus abiraterone-treated patients who crossed over to enzalutamide (HR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89-1.35). These results were confirmed by sensitivity analysis, which considered prognostic variables.

Conclusions

Retrospective analysis of the VHA database indicated that chemotherapy-naive patients with mCRPC initiating therapy with enzalutamide had improved survival versus abiraterone.

SUBMITTER: Tagawa ST

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8616757 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionProstate cancer (PC) is the second leading cause of cancer death among US men and accounts for considerable healthcare expenditures. We evaluated economic outcomes in men with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC) treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (abiraterone).MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis on 3174 men (18 years or older) utilizing the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database from 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2018. Men with mCRPC were included if they had at least one pharmacy claim for enzalutamide or abiraterone (first claim date = index date) following surgical or medical castration, had no chemotherapy treatment within 12 months prior to the index date, and had continuous VHA enrollment for at least 12 months pre- and post-index date. Men were followed until death, disenrollment, or end of study and were 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM). All-cause and PC-related resource use and costs per patient per month (PPPM) in the 12 months post index were compared between matched cohorts.ResultsWe identified 1229 men with mCRPC prescribed enzalutamide and 1945 prescribed abiraterone with mean ages of 74 and 73 years, respectively. After PSM, each cohort had 1160 patients. The enzalutamide cohort had fewer all-cause (2.51 vs 2.86; p < 0.0001) and PC-related outpatient visits (0.86 vs 1.03; p < 0.0001), with corresponding lower all-cause ($2588 vs $3115; p < 0.0001) and PC-related ($1356 vs $1775; p < 0.0001) PPPM outpatient costs compared with the abiraterone cohort. All-cause total costs (medical and pharmacy) PPPM ($8085 vs $9092; p = 0.0002) and PC-related total costs PPPM ($6321 vs $7280; p < 0.0001) were significantly lower in the enzalutamide cohort compared with the abiraterone cohort.ConclusionsEnzalutamide-treated men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC had significantly lower resource utilization and healthcare costs compared with abiraterone-treated men.

Project description:IntroductionEnzalutamide and abiraterone acetate (plus prednisone) are new hormonal treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study compared treatment duration, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and treatment costs for chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate in the USA.MethodsChemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients initiating treatment with enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate were identified from administrative claims. Continuous enrollment ≥ 6 months before and ≥ 3 months after the index date (initiation date of enzalutamide or abiraterone acetate) was required. Treatment duration, all-cause and prostate cancer-related HRU, and costs were estimated during the post-index period. Multivariable analyses compared HRU and costs between cohorts, adjusting for baseline characteristics.ResultsOverall, 920 chemotherapy-naïve patients initiated enzalutamide and 2310 initiated abiraterone acetate (median follow-up, 10.7 and 13.5 months, respectively). More enzalutamide-treated patients had corticosteroid-sensitive comorbidities at baseline. Treatment duration was longer with enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate (median, 10.7 vs. 8.8 months; P = 0.008). Enzalutamide was associated with fewer all-cause inpatient admissions [adjusted incidence rate ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.87 (0.76, 0.99)], days of hospitalization [0.84 (0.70, 1.02)], and outpatient visits [0.94 (0.90, 0.98)], and fewer prostate cancer-related outpatient visits [0.92 (0.87, 0.96)] compared with abiraterone acetate. Enzalutamide was also associated with lower prostate cancer-related inpatient and emergency department costs [adjusted differences, $122 (P = 0.024) and $28 (P = 0.009), respectively].ConclusionChemotherapy-naïve mCRPC patients treated with enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate had longer treatment duration and incurred lower HRU and prostate cancer-related inpatient and emergency department costs.FundingAstellas Pharma Inc.

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is hypothesised that cotargeting the androgen receptor (AR) and paracrine androgen biosynthesis with enzalutamide and abiraterone acetate in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) will dissipate adaptive feedback loops observed with either agent alone. OBJECTIVE:To assess the safety, efficacy, androgen signalling/metabolome, and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of enzalutamide with abiraterone acetate in progressive bone mCRPC (bmCRPC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:This open-label, single-centre interventional study was conducted in bmCRPC patients. INTERVENTION:Enzalutamide 160mg and abiraterone acetate 1000mg once daily; prednisone 5mg twice daily. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS:Adverse events (AEs), prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response, progression-free survival (PFS), tumour biomarker/metabolite expression, and Cmin plasma concentrations were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS:Sixty patients were enrolled. Common AEs independent of grade/causality included fatigue (72%), hyperglycaemia (67%), alkaline phosphatase (ALP) elevation (53%), and hot flush (43%). Grade 3 AEs included hypertension (17%), alanine aminotransferase elevation (12%), ALP elevation (5%), and arthralgia (5%). No treatment-related grade 4 AEs or deaths were reported. Median treatment-discontinuation time was 312d (95% confidence interval [CI] 196.0-483.0). Maximal PSA decline ?50% and ?90% occurred in 46 (77%) and 29 (48%) patients, respectively. Median PFS was 251d (95% CI 147-337). At week 9, median tumour microenvironment androgens, precursors, and nuclear AR expression decreased (p<0.001). The baseline tumour AR C/N terminal ratio of ?80% was associated with treatment benefit. At enzalutamide steady state, abiraterone acetate Cmin was ?23% lower (range 14.05-200.5ng/ml) than when given alone. CONCLUSIONS:Enzalutamide combined with abiraterone acetate has a manageable safety profile, without a meaningful DDI. Both agents are pharmacodynamically active with no feedback. Efficacy findings do not support significant benefit of combined treatment for unselected bmCRPC. PATIENT SUMMARY:This is the first study combining enzalutamide plus abiraterone in bone metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Results show that this combination is safe.

Project description:IntroductionEnzalutamide significantly improved clinical outcomes compared with placebo in patients with chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with disease progression despite androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in the PREVAIL study. However, few patients from Asia were enrolled. Our study (NCT02294461) aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of enzalutamide in this disease setting in patients in mainland China, Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong.MethodsIn this double-blind, phase III study, patients with asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic metastatic prostate cancer and disease progression despite ADT were randomized to enzalutamide (160 mg/day) or placebo. The primary endpoint was time to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, radiographic progression-free survival, time to first skeletal-related event (SRE), time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy, PSA response ≥ 50%, best overall soft-tissue response, and safety. Pre-planned interim analysis was scheduled following approximately 175 PSA-progression events (67% of targeted total of 261 events). An additional 5-year landmark analysis of overall survival, time to antineoplastic therapy, and safety was performed.ResultsThe double-blind study period was stopped after interim analysis owing to the benefit of enzalutamide over placebo. Overall, 388 patients were randomized (enzalutamide, n = 198; placebo, n = 190). Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment groups. Enzalutamide significantly reduced risk of PSA progression vs placebo (hazard ratio 0.38; 95% CI 0.27-0.52; P < 0.0001). Median time to PSA progression was 8.31 months with enzalutamide and 2.86 months with placebo. Secondary endpoints, including 5-year overall survival, were significantly improved with enzalutamide, except time to first SRE. Adverse-event incidence was similar between enzalutamide and placebo. Fatigue was the most common drug-related adverse event in both treatment groups.ConclusionEnzalutamide significantly reduced risk of PSA progression, improved secondary efficacy endpoints, and was well tolerated in chemotherapy-naïve Asian patients with mCRPC with disease progression despite ADT.Trial registrationwww.Clinicaltrialsgov NCT02294461.

Project description:PurposeMetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) remains a lethal disease with current standard-of-care therapies. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) gene alterations, including BRCA1/2 alterations, can sensitize cancer cells to poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition, which may improve outcomes in treatment-naïve mCRPC when combined with androgen receptor signaling inhibition.MethodsMAGNITUDE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03748641) is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded study that evaluates niraparib and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (niraparib + AAP) in patients with (HRR+, n = 423) or without (HRR-, n = 247) HRR-associated gene alterations, as prospectively determined by tissue/plasma-based assays. Patients were assigned 1:1 to receive niraparib + AAP or placebo + AAP. The primary end point, radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) assessed by central review, was evaluated first in the BRCA1/2 subgroup and then in the full HRR+ cohort, with secondary end points analyzed for the full HRR+ cohort if rPFS was statistically significant. A futility analysis was preplanned in the HRR- cohort.ResultsMedian rPFS in the BRCA1/2 subgroup was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.6 v 10.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.79; P = .001). In the overall HRR+ cohort, rPFS was significantly longer in the niraparib + AAP group compared with the placebo + AAP group (16.5 v 13.7 months; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.96; P = .022). These findings were supported by improvement in the secondary end points of time to symptomatic progression and time to initiation of cytotoxic chemotherapy. In the HRR- cohort, futility was declared per the prespecified criteria. Treatment with niraparib + AAP was tolerable, with anemia and hypertension as the most reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events.ConclusionCombination treatment with niraparib + AAP significantly lengthened rPFS in patients with HRR+ mCRPC compared with standard-of-care AAP.[Media: see text].