1
|
Leaning D, Kaur G, Morgans AK, Ghouse R, Mirante O, Chowdhury S. Treatment landscape and burden of disease in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: systematic and structured literature reviews. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1240864. [PMID: 37829336 PMCID: PMC10565658 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1240864] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2023] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 10/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Purpose Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is a lethal disease that imposes a major burden on patients and healthcare systems. Three structured literature reviews (treatment guidelines, treatment landscape, and human/clinical/patient burden) and one systematic literature review (economic burden) were conducted to better understand the disease burden and unmet needs for patients with late-stage mCRPC, for whom optimal treatment options are unclear. Methods Embase®, MEDLINE®, MEDLINE® In-Process, the CENTRAL database (structured and systematic reviews), and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database (systematic review only) were searched for English-language records from 2009 to 2021 to identify mCRPC treatment guidelines and studies related to the treatment landscape and the humanistic/economic burden of mCRPC in adult men (aged ≥18 years) of any ethnicity. Results In total, six records were included for the treatment patterns review, 14 records for humanistic burden, nine records for economic burden, three records (two studies) for efficacy, and eight records for safety. Real-world treatment patterns were broadly aligned with treatment guidelines and provided no optimal treatment sequencing beyond second line other than palliative care. Current post-docetaxel treatments in mCRPC are associated with adverse events that cause relatively high rates of treatment discontinuation or disruption. The humanistic and economic burdens associated with mCRPC are high. Conclusion The findings highlight a lack of treatment options with novel mechanisms of action and more tolerable safety profiles that satisfy a risk-to-benefit ratio aligned with patient needs and preferences for patients with late-stage mCRPC. Treatment approaches that improve survival and health-related quality of life are needed, ideally while simultaneously reducing costs and healthcare resource utilization.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Darren Leaning
- Department of Radiology and Oncology, James Cook University Hospital, South Tees NHS Trust, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom
| | - Gagandeep Kaur
- Parexel Access Consulting, Parexel International, Mohali, Punjab, India
| | - Alicia K. Morgans
- Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Ray Ghouse
- Advanced Accelerator Applications, a Novartis Company, Genève, Switzerland
| | - Osvaldo Mirante
- Advanced Accelerator Applications, a Novartis Company, Genève, Switzerland
| | - Simon Chowdhury
- Department of Urological Cancer, Guy’s, King’s, and St. Thomas’ Hospitals, and Sarah Cannon Research Institute, London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Halwani AS, Rasmussen KM, Patil V, Li CC, Yong CM, Burningham Z, Gupta S, Narayanan S, Lin SW, Carroll S, Mhatre SK, Graff JN, Dreicer R, Sauer BC. Real-world practice patterns in veterans with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Urol Oncol 2019; 38:1.e1-1.e10. [PMID: 31704142 DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.09.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2018] [Revised: 09/25/2019] [Accepted: 09/28/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is incurable, with most patients surviving less than 3 years. However, many treatments that extend survival have been approved in the past decade. OBJECTIVE To describe the patient demographics, disease characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcomes in a cohort of Veterans diagnosed with mCRPC in the Veterans Health Administration. DESIGN We identified 3,637 Veterans diagnosed with prostate cancer between January 2006 and August 2015 with evidence of mCRPC through December 2016. We described the most commonly used systemic mCRPC treatments according to mCRPC diagnosis era: Epoch 1 (2006-2010) or Epoch 2 (2011-2016). Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment patterns were examined using descriptive statistics. An unadjusted Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate the median time to biochemical progression and overall survival (OS) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS The median age at initial prostate cancer diagnosis was 68 years. Approximately 67% of patients were non-Hispanic white, 29% were black, and 4% were other/unknown. A high-risk Gleason score (8-10) was reported in 748 (67%) of patients in Epoch 1 and 1578 (63%) of patients in Epoch 2, and the median prostate-specific antigen level at initial prostate cancer diagnosis was higher in Epoch 1 patients than in Epoch 2 patients (68 vs. 35 ng/ml). Following mCRPC diagnosis, the most common first-line therapies in Epoch 1 patients were docetaxel (83%) and abiraterone (9%), whereas Epoch 2 patients mainly received abiraterone (47%), docetaxel (36%), and enzalutamide (15%). In Epoch 1 and Epoch 2 patients, the median time to biochemical progression (unadjusted) was 9 and 13 months, respectively, and the median OS (unadjusted) was 15 and 23 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The introduction of new therapies has resulted in increased use of the noncytotoxic agents abiraterone and enzalutamide as first-line treatment in lieu of docetaxel. Our results suggest that more recently diagnosed patients (Epoch 2) have a delayed time to biochemical progression and longer OS (unadjusted) compared with patients diagnosed earlier (Epoch 1).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmad S Halwani
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Kelli M Rasmussen
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT.
| | - Vikas Patil
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Catherine C Li
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Christina M Yong
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Zachary Burningham
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| | - Sumati Gupta
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Huntsman Cancer Institute, Salt Lake City, UT
| | | | - Shih-Wen Lin
- Genentech, Inc, South San Francisco, California, FL
| | | | | | - Julie N Graff
- Oregon Health & Science University, Knight Cancer Center, Portland, OR
| | - Robert Dreicer
- University of Virginia Cancer Center, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Brian C Sauer
- George E. Wahlen Veterans Health Administration, Salt Lake City, UT; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT
| |
Collapse
|