Longitudinal Trends in Costs of Palliative Radiation for Metastatic Prostate Cancer

Survival rates with external beam radiation therapy in newly diagnosed elderly metastatic prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The survival benefit of primary external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) has never been formally tested in elderly men who were newly diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa). We hypothesized that elderly patients may not benefit of EBRT to the extent as younger newly diagnosed mPCa patients, due to shorter life expectancy.

METHODS

We relied on Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (2004-2016) to identify elderly newly diagnosed mPCa patients, aged >75 years. Kaplan-Meier, univariable and multivariable Cox regression models, as well as Competing Risks Regression models tested the effect of EBRT versus no EBRT on overall mortality (OM) and cancer-specific mortality (CSM).

RESULTS

Of 6556 patients, 1105 received EBRT (16.9%). M1b stage was predominant in both EBRT (n = 823; 74.5%) and no EBRT (n = 3908; 71.7%, p = 0.06) groups, followed by M1c (n = 211; 19.1% vs. n = 1042; 19.1%, p = 1) and M1a (n = 29; 2.6% vs. n = 268; 4.9%, p < 0.01). Median overall survival (OS) was 23 months for EBRT and 23 months for no EBRT (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97, p = 0.6). Similarly, median cancer-specific survival (CSS) was 29 months for EBRT versus 30 months for no EBRT (HR: 1.04, p = 0.4). After additional multivariable adjustment, EBRT was not associated with lower OM or lower CSM in the entire cohort, as well as after stratification for M1b and M1c substages.

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly men who were newly diagnosed with mPCa, EBRT does not affect OS or CSS. In consequence, our findings question the added value of local EBRT in elderly newly diagnosed mPCa patients.

Retrospective analysis of characteristics associated with higher-value radiotherapy episodes of care for bone metastases in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries

OBJECTIVES

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' newly enacted Radiation Oncology Model ('RO Model') was designed to test the cost-saving potential of prospective episode-based payments for radiation treatment for 17 cancer diagnoses by encouraging high-value care and more efficient care delivery. For bone metastases, evidence supports the use of higher-value, shorter courses of radiation (≤10 fractions). Our goal was to determine the prevalence of short radiation courses (≤10 fractions) for bone metastases and the setting, treatment and patient characteristics associated with such courses and their expenditures.

DESIGN

Using the RO Model episode file, we evaluated receipt of ≤10 fractions of radiotherapy for bone metastases and expenditures by treatment setting for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries during calendar years 2015-2017.Using unadjusted and adjusted regression models, we determined predictors of receipt of ≤10 fractions and expenditures. Multivariable models adjusted for treatment and patient characteristics.

RESULTS

There were 48 810 episodes for bone metastases during the period. A majority of episodes for ≤10 fractions occurred in hospital-outpatient settings (62.8% (N=22 715)). After adjusting for treatment and patient factors, hospital-outpatient treatment setting remained a significant predictor of receiving ≤10 fractions (adjusted OR 2.03 (95% CI 1.95, 2.12; p<0.001) vs free-standing). The greatest adjusted contributors to total expenditures were number of fractions (US$-3424 (95% CI US$-3412 to US$-3435) for ≤10 fractions vs >10; p<0.001) and treatment type (including US$7716 (95% CI US$7424 to US$8018) for intensity modulated radiation therapy vs conventional external beam; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A measurable performance gap exists for delivery of higher-value bone metastases radiotherapy under an episode-based model, associated with increased expenditures. The RO Model may succeed in improving the value of bone metastases radiation. Increasing the capacity of free-standing centres to implement palliative-focused services may improve the ability of these practices to succeed under the RO Model.

An Approach to Identify Delivery of Palliative Radiation Therapy Using Health Care Claims Data: A Proof-of-Concept Application of a Visual Analytics Tool

PURPOSE

There is limited information on the use of data visualization tools for health services research applications. We provide a proof-of-concept application that focuses on claims-based measures of palliative radiation therapy. We investigate whether a guided, data-driven investigation contributes information for subsequent statistical analysis and algorithm development.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used linked registry and claims data on men who were diagnosed with stage IV M0 or stage IV M1b prostate cancer between 2005 and 2009, with associated claims from 2005 through 2010, and receiving radiation therapy. Preprocessing of data was accomplished by using EventFlow software to investigate longitudinal patterns in claims for radiation therapy in the 13 months after cancer diagnosis. Guided by results from EventFlow, we developed descriptive statistics to investigate the length of radiation therapy, use of bone metastasis coding, and mortality between M1b and M0 patients.

RESULTS

A total of 1,151 patients met the inclusion criteria. Taking advantage of the novel aggregation capability of EventFlow, we observed differences in the length of radiation therapy and the use of bone metastasis coding between men with (M1b) and without (M0) a diagnosis of bone metastasis. Seventy-nine percent of M1b patients received radiation for a duration ≤ 4 weeks, which suggested palliative radiation (to the bone). Seventy-six percent of M0 patients received radiation for ≥ 6 weeks, which suggested radiation to the prostate. Mortality was higher among those who received a shorter duration of radiation therapy compared with those who received a longer duration of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Use of EventFlow, followed by statistical analysis of the linked registry and claims data, identified useful components of a claims-based measure of radiation to the bone.

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

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common cancer in Western countries. More than one third of PC patients develop metastatic disease, and the 5-year expected survival in distant disease is about 35%. During the last few years, new treatments have been launched for metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to review the current literature on health economic analysis on the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer (mPC), compare the studies, summarize the findings and make the results available to administrators and decision makers.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was done for economic evaluations (cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-of-illness, cost-of-drug, and cost-benefit analyses). We employed the PubMed^® search engine and searched for publications published between 2012 and 2016. The terms used were "prostate cancer", "metastatic" and "cost". An initial screening of all headlines was performed, selected abstracts were analysed, and finally the full papers investigated. Study characteristics, treatment and comparator, country, type of evaluation, perspective, year of value, time horizon, efficacy data, discount rate, total costs and sensitivity analysis were analysed. The quality was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument.

RESULTS

A total of 227 publications were detected and screened, 58 selected for full-text assessment and 31 included in the final analyses. Despite the significant international literature on the treatment of mCRPC, there were only 15 studies focusing on cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Medical treatment constituted two thirds of the selected studies. Significant costs in the treatment of mCRPC were disclosed. In the pre-docetaxel setting, both abiraterone acetate (AA) and enzalutamide were concluded beyond accepted cost/quality-adjusted life year limits. In the docetaxel refractory setting, most studies concluded that enzalutamide was cost-effective and superior to AA. In most studies, cabazitaxel was not recommended, because of high cost. Looking at bone-targeting drugs, generic zoledronic acid (ZA) was recommended. External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) was analysed in three studies, and single fraction radiotherapy was concluded to be cost saving. Radium-223 was documented as beneficial, but costly. The quality of the studies was generally good, but sensitivity analyses, discounting and the measurement of health outcomes were present in less than two thirds of the selected studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of mCRPC was associated with significant cost. In the post-docetaxel setting, single fraction radiotherapy and enzalutamide were considered cost-effective in most studies. Generic ZA was the recommended bone-targeting therapy.

A review of patterns of practice and clinical guidelines in the palliative radiation treatment of uncomplicated bone metastases

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Single fraction radiation treatment (SFRT) is recommended for its equivalence to multiple-fraction (MF) RT in the palliation of uncomplicated bone metastases (BM). However, adoption of SFRT has been slow.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Literature searches for studies published following 2014 were conducted using online repositories of gray literature, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and Embase Classic, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases.

RESULTS

A total of 32 articles detailing patterns of practice and clinical practice guidelines were included for final synthesis. The majority of organizations have released high level recommendations for SFRT use in treatment of uncomplicated BM, based on evidence of non-inferiority to MFRT. There are key differences between guidelines, such as varying strengths of recommendation for SFRT use over MFRT; contraindication in vertebral sites for SFRT; and risk estimation of pathologic fractures after SFRT. Differences in guidelines may be influenced by committee composition and organization mandate. Differences in patterns of practice may be influenced by individual center policies, payment modalities and consideration of patient factors such as age, prognosis, and performance status.

CONCLUSION

Although there is some variation between groups, the majority of guidelines recommend use of SFRT and others consider it to be a reasonable alternative to MFRT.