ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective To assess the cost-effectiveness of chemohormonal therapy in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive and non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. Methods An analytical decision model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness of chemohormonal therapy versus androgen deprivation therapy alone in patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and patients with non-metastatic high-risk prostate cancer. The cost-effectiveness in metastatic patients with a high-volume disease was assessed separately. The model used data from randomized clinical trials and drug acquisition costs in Brazil. In addition, the costs of post-progression therapies have been included in this model. The benefits to health are expressed as the quality-adjusted life-years, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated. Results Chemohormonal therapy may be associated with improved quality-adjusted life-years for all patient. The improvement was more than six times greater for patients with high-volume metastatic disease. In these patients, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were up to 74% lower than the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of patients with non-metastatic disease. Conclusion Chemohormonal therapy has been more cost-effective in patients with high-volume metastatic disease.
RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a relação custo-efetividade da adição de quimioterapia hormonal em pacientes com câncer de próstata metastático sensível a hormônio ou localizado de alto risco. Métodos Um modelo de decisão analítico foi desenvolvido para determinar o custo-efetividade da adição de quimioterapia versus a monoterapia de privação de andrógeno para pacientes com câncer de próstata metastático hormônio-sensível e pacientes de alto risco com câncer de próstata não metastático. O custo-efetividade em pacientes metastáticos com um alto volume da doença foi verificado isoladamente. Os dados do modelo foram obtidos de ensaios clínicos randomizados utilizando custos de aquisição de medicamentos no Brasil. Os custos de terapias pós-progressão também foram incluídos no modelo. Os efeitos foram expressos em anos de vida ajustados por qualidade, e foram calculadas as razões de custo-efetividade incremental. Resultados A adição de quimioterapia levou a um ganho de anos de vida ajustados por qualidade para todos os doentes. Este incremento foi seis vezes maior para os pacientes com doença metastática de alto volume. Nestes pacientes, as taxas do custo incremental por anos de vida ajustados por qualidade foram até 74% mais baixos do que o aumento das taxas dos pacientes com doença não metastática. Conclusão A adição de quimioterapia foi mais custo-efetiva para pacientes com doença metastática de alto volume.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Prostatic Neoplasms/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Quality-Adjusted Life Years , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/administration & dosage , Taxoids/administration & dosage , Androgen Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Prostatic Neoplasms/mortality , Prostatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/economics , Treatment Outcome , DocetaxelABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Few data are available concerning the clinical outcome of abiraterone acetate treatment in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in terms of the duration of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) before diagnosis of CRPC. We investigated the clinical efficacy of abiraterone acetate according to the duration of ADT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of 20 patients with mCRPC who received abiraterone acetate after failure of docetaxel chemotherapy from May 2012 to March 2014 at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital. Clinical factors including prostate-specific antigen (PSA) nadir level, time to PSA nadir, PSA doubling time, PSA response, and modes of progression (PSA, radiologic, clinical) were analyzed. Disease progression was classified according to the Prostate Cancer Working Group 2 criteria. RESULTS: The mean age and PSA value of the entire cohort were 76.0+/-7.2 years and 158.8+/-237.9 ng/mL, respectively. The median follow-up duration was 13.4+/-6.7 months. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical characteristics between patients who received abiraterone acetate with ADT duration or =35 months. There were also no significant differences in terms of PSA progression-free survival, radiologic progression-free survival, and clinical progression-free survival between patients with ADT duration or =35 months. CONCLUSIONS: Although this was a retrospective study with a small sample size, we did not observe any statistically significant differences in the clinical response to abiraterone acetate between mCRPC patients with long ADT duration and those with short ADT duration in terms of disease progression-free survival.