Kristine Kreis1, Dirk Horenkamp-Sonntag2, Udo Schneider2, Jan Zeidler3, Gerd Glaeske4, Lothar Weissbach5. 1. Center for Health Economics Research Hannover (CHERH), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover, Otto-Brenner-Straße 7, 30159, Hannover, Germany. kjk@cherh.de. 2. Versorgungsmanagement, Techniker Krankenkasse, Bramfelder Straße 140, 22305, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Center for Health Economics Research Hannover (CHERH), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover, Otto-Brenner-Straße 7, 30159, Hannover, Germany. 4. Forschungszentrum Ungleichheit und Sozialpolitik, Universität Bremen - SOCIUM, Mary-Somerville-Str. 5, 28359, Bremen, Germany. 5. Gesundheitsforschung für Männer gGmbH, Muthesiusstr. 7, 12163, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Treatments for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded rapidly. They include the chemotherapies docetaxel and cabazitaxel, hormonal drugs abiraterone and enzalutamide, and best supportive care (BSC). Cabazitaxel has proven to be the last life-prolonging option, associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events. Given the lack of real-world evidence, we aimed to compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel, docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and BSC. METHODS: We used 2014-2017 claims data from a large German statutory health insurance fund, the Techniker Krankenkasse, to identify patients with mCRPC. Patient allocation to individual therapy regimens was based on clinical knowledge and included therapy cycles, duration of therapy, and continuous treatment. The study period lasted from the first claim until death, the end of data availability, a drug switch, or discontinuation of therapy, whichever came first. Multivariate regression models were used to compare monthly all-cause and mCRPC-related HRU and costs across cohorts by adjusting for baseline covariates (including age and comorbidities). RESULTS: The 3944 identified patients with mCRPC initiated treatment with cabazitaxel (n = 240), docetaxel (n = 539), abiraterone (n = 486), enzalutamide (n = 351), or BSC (n = 2328). In most domains, HRU was highest in the cabazitaxel cohort and lowest in the BSC group. Accordingly, the highest all-cause and mCRPC-related costs per month, respectively, were observed in patients receiving cabazitaxel (€7631/€6343), followed by abiraterone (€5226/€4579), enzalutamide (€5079/€4416), docetaxel (€2392/€1580), and BSC (€959/€438). Cost variations were mostly attributable to drugs, inpatient treatment, and sick leave payments. CONCLUSION: mCRPC treatment imposes a high economic burden on statutory health insurance. Cabazitaxel is associated with substantially higher expenses, resulting from higher drug costs and a greater need for inpatient treatment. As mCRPC continues to be incurable, decision makers and clinician leaders should carefully evaluate public access to innovative agents and optimal treatment strategies.
PURPOSE: Treatments for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded rapidly. They include the chemotherapies docetaxel and cabazitaxel, hormonal drugs abiraterone and enzalutamide, and best supportive care (BSC). Cabazitaxel has proven to be the last life-prolonging option, associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events. Given the lack of real-world evidence, we aimed to compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel, docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and BSC. METHODS: We used 2014-2017 claims data from a large German statutory health insurance fund, the Techniker Krankenkasse, to identify patients with mCRPC. Patient allocation to individual therapy regimens was based on clinical knowledge and included therapy cycles, duration of therapy, and continuous treatment. The study period lasted from the first claim until death, the end of data availability, a drug switch, or discontinuation of therapy, whichever came first. Multivariate regression models were used to compare monthly all-cause and mCRPC-related HRU and costs across cohorts by adjusting for baseline covariates (including age and comorbidities). RESULTS: The 3944 identified patients with mCRPC initiated treatment with cabazitaxel (n = 240), docetaxel (n = 539), abiraterone (n = 486), enzalutamide (n = 351), or BSC (n = 2328). In most domains, HRU was highest in the cabazitaxel cohort and lowest in the BSC group. Accordingly, the highest all-cause and mCRPC-related costs per month, respectively, were observed in patients receiving cabazitaxel (€7631/€6343), followed by abiraterone (€5226/€4579), enzalutamide (€5079/€4416), docetaxel (€2392/€1580), and BSC (€959/€438). Cost variations were mostly attributable to drugs, inpatient treatment, and sick leave payments. CONCLUSION:mCRPC treatment imposes a high economic burden on statutory health insurance. Cabazitaxel is associated with substantially higher expenses, resulting from higher drug costs and a greater need for inpatient treatment. As mCRPC continues to be incurable, decision makers and clinician leaders should carefully evaluate public access to innovative agents and optimal treatment strategies.
Authors: Stéphane Oudard; Karim Fizazi; Lisa Sengeløv; Gedske Daugaard; Fred Saad; Steinbjørn Hansen; Marie Hjälm-Eriksson; Jacek Jassem; Antoine Thiery-Vuillemin; Orazio Caffo; Daniel Castellano; Paul N Mainwaring; John Bernard; Liji Shen; Mustapha Chadjaa; Oliver Sartor Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Giandomenico Roviello; Sandra Sigala; Shahneen Sandhu; Alberto Bonetta; Maria Rosa Cappelletti; Laura Zanotti; Alberto Bottini; Cora N Sternberg; Stephen B Fox; Daniele Generali Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2016-05-07 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Matthew R Smith; Fairooz Kabbinavar; Fred Saad; Arif Hussain; Marc C Gittelman; David L Bilhartz; Chris Wynne; Robin Murray; Norman R Zinner; Claude Schulman; Ronald Linnartz; Ming Zheng; Carsten Goessl; Yong-Jiang Hei; Eric J Small; Richard Cook; Celestia S Higano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2005-05-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Philipp Nuhn; Johann S De Bono; Karim Fizazi; Stephen J Freedland; Maurizio Grilli; Philip W Kantoff; Guru Sonpavde; Cora N Sternberg; Srinivasan Yegnasubramanian; Emmanuel S Antonarakis Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-04-16 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Johann Sebastian de Bono; Stephane Oudard; Mustafa Ozguroglu; Steinbjørn Hansen; Jean-Pascal Machiels; Ivo Kocak; Gwenaëlle Gravis; Istvan Bodrogi; Mary J Mackenzie; Liji Shen; Martin Roessner; Sunil Gupta; A Oliver Sartor Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-10-02 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Carmel J Pezaro; Aurelius G Omlin; Amelia Altavilla; David Lorente; Roberta Ferraldeschi; Diletta Bianchini; David Dearnaley; Christopher Parker; Johann S de Bono; Gerhardt Attard Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Thomas Grochtdreis; Hans-Helmut König; Alexander Dobruschkin; Gunhild von Amsberg; Judith Dams Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 3.240