This site is intended for healthcare professionals
Journals
  • Home
  • /
  • Journals
  • /
  • Prostate Cancer
  • /
  • Effectiveness, safety and cost of abiraterone acet...
Journal

Effectiveness, safety and cost of abiraterone acetate in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a real-world data analysis.

Read time: 1 mins
Published:17th Jul 2018
Author: Koninckx M, Marco JL, Pérez I, Faus MT, Alcolea V, Gómez F.
Availability: Pay for access, or by subscription
Ref.:Clin Transl Oncol. 2018.
DOI:10.1007/s12094-018-1921-5

Purpose: New therapies with diverse mechanisms of action are available for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness, safety and cost of abiraterone acetate (AA) in patients with mCRPC.

Materials andc methods: Observational retrospective cohort study in which mCRPC patients who initiated AA between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2017, were included. The patients were followed-up until death or March 31, 2018. Demographic, clinical and economic data were collected from the corporate electronic information systems. Survival distributions were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.

Results: A total of 69 mCRPC patients were started on AA, of whom 18 (26.1%) received prior chemotherapy (post-CT) and 51 (73.9%) did not receive it (CT-naïve). A PSA decline of ≥ 50% was achieved in five (27.8%) post-CT and 32 (62.7%) CT-naïve patients (p = 0.011). Median time to PSA progression, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 4.4/7.9 months (p = 0.003), 5.1/7.5 months (p = 0.034) and 12.1/21.3 months (p = 0.119), respectively, for post-CT/CT-naïve patients. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 10 (55.6%) post-CT and 11 (21.6%) CT-naïve patients (p = 0.007). The most common AEs were hypokalaemia (11.6%), hypertension (8.7%) and fatigue (5.8%). The cost per median PFS month and per median OS month was €2818.4/€2784.3 and €1187.9/€980.4 for post-CT/CT-naïve patients, respectively.

Conclusions: CT-naïve patients treated with AA obtained a better clinical benefit in terms of effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness ratio than post-CT patients. The effectiveness outcomes were poorer than those reported previously in the clinical trial setting.

 

Read abstract on library site

Access full article