Literature DB >> 27570999

Number needed to treat and associated incremental costs of treatment with enzalutamide versus abiraterone acetate plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Marjan Massoudi1, Mark Balk2, Hongbo Yang3, Cat N Bui1, Bhavik J Pandya1, Jenny Guo3, Yan Song3, Eric Q Wu3, Bruce Brown1, Arie Barlev2, Scott Flanders1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Enzalutamide (ENZA) and abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA) are approved second-generation hormone therapies for chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study compared ENZA with AA in chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC by calculating the number needed to treat (NNT) and associated incremental costs to achieve one additional chemotherapy-naïve patient with mCRPC free of radiographic progression, chemotherapy, or death over a 1-year time horizon.
METHODS: Clinical outcomes were obtained from the PREVAIL and COU-AA-302 trials. Three outcomes were evaluated: radiographic progression-free survival, time to cytotoxic chemotherapy initiation, and overall survival at 1 year. NNT was calculated as the reciprocal of the outcome event rate difference for ENZA compared with AA. The incremental costs to achieve one additional outcome at 1 year were calculated as the difference in cost per treated patient multiplied by the NNT. Per-treated-patient costs were considered from a US payer perspective and included medications, monitoring, adverse events, post-progression treatments, and end-of-life care.
RESULTS: Within a 1-year time horizon, the total cost per treated patient for ENZA was $2,666 less than AA. Compared with AA, treating 14 patients with ENZA resulted in one additional patient free of progression or death over 1 year; treating 26 patients with ENZA resulted in one additional patient with chemotherapy delayed over 1 year; and treating 91 patients with ENZA resulted in one additional patient free of death over 1 year. Therefore, ENZA is cost-effective compared with AA for all three outcomes evaluated, and the modeled results suggest ENZA is associated with potentially improved clinical outcomes in delaying chemotherapy initiation and disease progression for chemotherapy-naïve patients. The results are robust in sensitivity analyses, where the effect of changes in key model inputs and assumptions were tested.
CONCLUSION: The results modeled in the present study suggest ENZA is cost-effective compared with AA for treating chemotherapy-naïve patients with mCRPC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abiraterone; Castration-resistant prostate cancer; Cost per outcome; Cost-effectiveness; Enzalutamide; Number needed to treat

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27570999     DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2016.1229670

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Econ        ISSN: 1369-6998            Impact factor:   2.448


  8 in total

Review 1.  Enzalutamide: A Review in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Lesley J Scott
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 2.  Treatments for Metastatic Prostate Cancer (mPC): A Review of Costing Evidence.

Authors:  Jan Norum; Carsten Nieder
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Cost-effectiveness of long-acting insulin analogues vs intermediate/long-acting human insulin for type 1 diabetes: A population-based cohort followed over 10 years.

Authors:  Tsung-Ying Lee; Shihchen Kuo; Chen-Yi Yang; Huang-Tz Ou
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Treatment-Related Healthcare Costs of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Germany: A Claims Data Study.

Authors:  Kristine Kreis; Dirk Horenkamp-Sonntag; Udo Schneider; Jan Zeidler; Gerd Glaeske; Lothar Weissbach
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2021-06

Review 5.  Enzalutamide and blocking androgen receptor in advanced prostate cancer: lessons learnt from the history of drug development of antiandrogens.

Authors:  Yusuke Ito; Marianne D Sadar
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2018-02-16

6.  Cost-Utility Analysis of Lipegfilgrastim Compared to Pegfilgrastim for the Prophylaxis of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia in Patients with Stage II-IV Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Esse I H Akpo; Irshaad R Jansen; Edith Maes; Steven Simoens
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 5.810

7.  Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review.

Authors:  Thomas Grochtdreis; Hans-Helmut König; Alexander Dobruschkin; Gunhild von Amsberg; Judith Dams
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Number-needed-to-treat analysis of clinical progression in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in the STRIVE and TERRAIN trials.

Authors:  Neil M Schultz; Neal D Shore; Simon Chowdhury; Laurence H Klotz; Raoul S Concepcion; David F Penson; Lawrence I Karsh; Hongbo Yang; Bruce A Brown; Arie Barlev; Scott C Flanders
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 2.264

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.