Baylor Coll of Medcn, Houston, TX
Neil Rohit Parikh , Eric M. Chang , Nicholas George Nickols , Matthew Rettig , Ann C. Raldow , Michael L. Steinberg , Bridget F. Koontz , Neha Vapiwala , Curtiland Deville , Felix Y Feng , Daniel Eidelberg Spratt , Robert Evan Reiter , Ryan Phillips , Phuoc T. Tran , Amar Upadhyaya Kishan
Background: Low-volume de novo metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has historically been treated with lifelong androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). Recently, however, the addition of several advanced therapeutic options – radiation therapy (RT) to the primary, advanced hormonal therapy agents such as abiraterone acetate/prednisone (AAP), and chemotherapy – to ADT have been shown to improve survival in low-volume mHSPC. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of treating low-volume mHSPC patients upfront with RT+ADT, AAP+ADT, or docetaxel+ADT. Methods: A Markov-based cost-effectiveness analysis was constructed comparing three treatment strategies for low-volume mHSPC patients: (1) upfront RT+ADT --> salvage AAP+ADT --> salvage docetaxel+ADT; (2) upfront AAP+ADT --> salvage docetaxel+ADT, and (3) upfront docetaxel+ADT --> salvage AAP+ADT. Transition probabilities were calculated using data from STAMPEDE arms C/G/H, COU-AA-301, COU-AA-302, and TAX-327. RT was delivered via five-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy. The analysis utilized a 10-year time horizon, and a $100,000/quality adjusted life year (QALY) willingness-to-pay threshold. Utilities were extracted from the literature; costs were taken from Medicare fee schedules and VA oral drug contracts. Results: At 10 years, total cost was $140K, $259K, and $189K, with total QALYs of 4.66, 5.03, and 3.72 for strategies (1) upfront RT+ADT, (2) upfront AAP+ADT, and (3) upfront docetaxel+ADT, respectively. Compared to upfront RT+ADT, upfront AAP+ADT was not cost-effective (ICER: $321K/QALY). This result remained unchanged even after modification of various model inputs in 1-way sensitivity analysis. Upfront docetaxel+ADT was both more costly and less effective than upfront RT+ADT (ICER: -$53K/QALY). Conclusions: At 10 years, RT+ADT is cost-effective compared to other advanced systemic therapy options alone, and should be considered as a viable treatment strategy in all patients with a low-burden of metastatic disease. Additional studies are needed to determine whether any benefit exists in combining RT to the primary with upfront advanced systemic therapy.
Disclaimer
This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org
Abstract Disclosures
2022 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Zachery R Reichert
2023 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Manish Kohli
2024 ASCO Genitourinary Cancers Symposium
First Author: Prantik Das
2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
First Author: Valentina Guadalupi