Drug-drug interaction potential among patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) treated with novel androgen receptor inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients are often older and use concurrent medications that increase the potential for drug-drug interactions (pDDIs). This study assessed pDDI prevalence in real-world nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide, darolutamide, or enzalutamide. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Castrated prostate cancer patients without metastases prior to androgen receptor inhibitor initiation were identified retrospectively via Optum Clinformatics Data Mart claims data (8/2019-3/2021). The top 100 concomitant medications were assessed for pDDIs. RESULTS: Among 1,515 patients (mean age: 77 ± 8 years; mean Charlson Comorbidity Index: 3 ± 3), 340 initiated apalutamide, 112 darolutamide, and 1,063 enzalutamide. Common concomitant medication classes were cardiovascular (80%) and central nervous system (52%). Two-thirds of the patients received ≥5 concomitant medications; 30 (30/100 medications) pDDIs were identified for apalutamide and enzalutamide each and 2 (2/100 medications) for darolutamide. Most pDDIs had risk ratings of C or D, but four for apalutamide were rated X. Approximately 58% of the patients on apalutamide, 5% on darolutamide, and 54% on enzalutamide had ≥1 identified pDDI. CONCLUSIONS: Results showed a higher frequency of pDDIs in patients receiving apalutamide and enzalutamide vs darolutamide. The impact of these could not be determined retrospectively. DDI risk should be carefully evaluated when discussing optimal therapy for patients with nmCRPC.

Next-Generation Sequencing Trends among Adult Patients with Select Advanced Tumor Types: A Real-World Evidence Evaluation.

There are limited data on the prevalence of next-generation sequencing (NGS) in the United States, especially in light of the increasing importance of identifying actionable oncogenic variants due to molecular biomarker-based therapy approvals. This retrospective study of adult patients with select metastatic solid tumors and central nervous system tumors from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart US health care claims database (January 1, 2014, to June 30, 2021; N = 63,209) examined NGS use trends over time. A modest increase in NGS was observed across tumor types from 2015 (0.0% to 1.5%) to 2021 (2.1% to 17.4%). A similar increase in NGS rates was also observed across key periods; however, rates in the final key period remained <10% for patients with breast, colorectal, head and neck, soft tissue sarcoma, and thyroid cancers, as well as central nervous system tumors. The median time to NGS from diagnosis was shortest among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer and longest for patients with breast cancer. Predictors of NGS varied by tumor type; test rates for minorities in select tumor types appeared comparable to the White population. Despite improving payer policies to expand coverage of NGS and molecular biomarker-based therapy approvals, NGS rates remained low across tumor types. Given the potential for improved patient outcomes with molecular biomarker-based therapy, further efforts to improve NGS rates are warranted.

Adverse events and costs among non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Limited real-world evidence exists on the economic burden of adverse events (AEs) to the healthcare system among patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) treated with second-generation androgen receptor antagonists (ARAs). Current data is needed to understand real-world clinical event rates among ARAs and the cost of these events. OBJECTIVES: Describe the incidence of non-central nervous system (CNS)-related AEs and CNS-related AEs among nmCRPC patients treated in the United States with second-generation ARAs (apalutamide and enzalutamide) and evaluate healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs for these patients. METHODS AND STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective observational cohort study using claims data from Optum Clinformatics Data Mart to identify adult males with prostate cancer, castration, no metastases, and >1 claim for apalutamide or enzalutamide. The study was conducted from January 2017 to March 2020, with a patient index identification period from January 2018 to December 2019. AEs were classified as CNS-related or non-CNS-related. RESULTS: Of 605 patients (156 apalutamide and 449 enzalutamide), most were ≥65 years (94%) and had ≥1 non-CNS-related AE (55%). Many had ≥1 CNS-related AE (32%). Pain (12%) and arthralgia (11%) were the most frequently reported non-CNS-related AEs. Fatigue/asthenia (14%) and dizziness (7%) were the most frequently reported CNS-related AEs. Among patients with versus without non-CNS-related AEs, 34% versus 8% had emergency room (ER) events, and 25% versus 2% had inpatient events. Among patients with versus without CNS-related AEs, 41% versus 14% had ER events, and 38% versus 4% had inpatient events. Adjusted per-patient per-year cost (in 2020 USD) differences were significant between patients with and without non-CNS-related AEs ($30,765, p = 0.0018) and between patients with and without CNS-related AEs ($40,689, p = 0.0017). CONCLUSION: There is significant HCRU and cost burden among nmCRPC patients treated with ARAs developing AEs, highlighting the need for treatments with improved tolerability. Additional studies are warranted to include recently approved agents.

Survival Outcomes by Race and Ethnicity in Veterans With Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Racial and ethnic disparities in prostate cancer are poorly understood. A given disparity-related factor may affect outcomes differently at each point along the highly variable trajectory of the disease. Objective: To examine clinical outcomes by race and ethnicity in patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) within the US Veterans Health Administration. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective, observational cohort study using electronic health care records (January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2021) in a nationwide equal-access health care system was conducted. Mean (SD) follow-up time was 4.3 (3.3) years. Patients included in the analysis were diagnosed with prostate cancer from January 1, 2006, to December 30, 2020, that progressed to nmCRPC defined by (1) increasing prostate-specific antigen levels, (2) ongoing androgen deprivation, and (3) no evidence of metastatic disease. Patients with metastatic disease or death within the landmark period (3 months after the first nmCRPC evidence) were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time from the landmark period to death or metastasis; the secondary outcome was overall survival. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, Kaplan-Meier estimates, and adjusted survival curves were used to evaluate outcome differences by race and ethnicity. Results: Of 12 992 patients in the cohort, 826 patients identified as Hispanic (6%), 3671 as non-Hispanic Black (28%; henceforth Black), 7323 as non-Hispanic White (56%; henceforth White), and 1172 of other race and ethnicity (9%; henceforth other, including American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, unknown by patient, and patient declined to answer). Median time elapsed from nmCRPC to metastasis or death was 5.96 (95% CI, 5.58-6.34) years for Black patients, 5.62 (95% CI, 5.11-6.67) years for Hispanic patients, 4.11 (95% CI, 3.96-4.25) years for White patients, and 3.59 (95% CI, 3.23-3.97) years for other patients. Median unadjusted overall survival was 6.26 (95% CI, 6.03-6.46) years among all patients, 8.36 (95% CI, 8.0-8.8) years for Black patients, 8.56 (95% CI, 7.3-9.7) years for Hispanic patients, 5.48 (95% CI, 5.2-5.7) years for White patients, and 4.48 (95% CI, 4.1-5.0) years for other patients. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study of patients with nmCRPC suggest that differences in outcomes by race and ethnicity exist; in addition, Black and Hispanic men may have considerably improved outcomes when treated in an equal-access setting.

Treatment Patterns of Follicular Lymphoma in the United States: A Claims Analysis.

Background: A consensus is lacking on optimal treatment sequencing for follicular lymphoma (FL), the most common indolent lymphoma. FL is incurable, and many patients require multiple lines of therapy for successive relapses. Guidelines provide numerous recommendations for first-, second-, and third-line therapy; however, treatment patterns in the real world remain poorly understood. Objectives: The primary objective of this study is to evaluate real-world treatment patterns among commercially insured patients with FL in the United States. Methods: A retrospective cohort of patients with newly diagnosed FL was identified from June 2008 to September 2016 using the IBM MarketScan® database. Treatment pattern measures, including time to treatment from diagnosis, days from previous line of therapy, duration of therapy, and distribution of treatment regimens among lines of therapy, were assessed. Descriptive statistics were reported for baseline characteristics, primary outcome, and treatment pattern measures. Results: In total, 4232 patients were identified from the database and 2111 patients received at least 1 line of treatment. The most common first-line treatments included bendamustine + rituximab (39%), rituximab + cyclophosphamide + doxorubicin + vincristine (20%), and rituximab monotherapy (19%). Rituximab monotherapy was the most common second-line (34%) and third or greater line (57%) treatment. The median time from FL diagnosis to initiation of treatment was 50 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 28-191) for first-line treatment, 577 days (IQR: 312-1146) for second-line, and 776 days (IQR: 603-1290) for third-line. Discussion: At a median follow-up of 3.6 years, most patients had 1 or fewer lines of therapy. The use of combination therapy decreased with each line of therapy and the numbers of patients receiving third- or fourth-line therapy were small in this study, potentially due to the short follow-up. Rituximab as monotherapy or in combination was utilized most frequently; however, the variety of other therapies used demonstrates that the standard management of FL remains unclear. Conclusions: Consensus on optimal treatment sequencing is currently lacking, and patients receive a variety of active regimens during routine practice. In this contemporary cohort of patients diagnosed with FL in the United States, rituximab therapy predominated both in monotherapy and in combination.

Real-world burden of adverse events for apalutamide- or enzalutamide-treated non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs) have been associated with adverse events (AEs) such as fatigue, falls, fractures, and rash in non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) patients as identified in clinical trials. The objectives of this study were to describe the incidence and management of AEs in patients receiving apalutamide and enzalutamide. METHODS: This retrospective chart review study was conducted in nmCRPC-treating sites in the United States. Patients starting apalutamide or enzalutamide between February 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 were included and any AEs they experienced were recorded. AEs, including those considered to be of special interest as defined in the pivotal clinical trials of the second-generation ARIs, were analyzed and grouped retrospectively in this study. Detailed chart data (patient demographics, clinical characteristics, treatment history, type of AE, outcomes, and resource utilization) were then collected for a randomly selected subset among patients with ≥1 AE to characterize AEs and their management. Descriptive results were summarized. RESULTS: Forty-three sites participated in the study. A total of 699 patients were included, of whom 525 (75.1%) experienced ≥1 AE. The most common AEs were fatigue/asthenia (34.3%), hot flush (13.9%), and arthralgia (13.6%). In the subset of 250 patients randomly selected from those who experienced ≥1 AE, patients were primarily White (72.0%), the mean age was 71 years, 86.0% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score of 0-1 at nmCRPC diagnosis, and the average prostate specific antigen (PSA) value at diagnosis was 23.2 ng/mL. PSA-doubling time < 10 months was chosen as reason to initiate treatment in 40% of patients. The median duration of follow-up was 1.1 years, with 14.4% of patients progressing to metastasis by end of study period. Grade 3-4 and Grade 5 AEs occurred in 14.4 and 0.4% of patients, respectively. Actions taken to manage AEs included AE-directed treatment (38.0%), ARI discontinuation (10.4%), dose reduction (7.6%), and AE-related hospitalization (4.8%). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the burden of AEs among nmCRPC patients treated with apalutamide or enzalutamide, providing a relevant real-world benchmark as clinical trial evidence and the treatment landcape for nmCRPC continues to evolve.

Clinical outcomes, management, and treatment patterns in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with radium-223 in community compared to academic settings.

BACKGROUND: The most common site of disease in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) is the bone. The ALSYMPCA study demonstrated that radium-223 significantly improved overall survival (OS) in mCRPC patients with symptomatic bone metastases and without visceral metastases. However, administration requires a multidisciplinary approach and an infrastructure that supports coordination of care, which may differ by practice site. We aimed to evaluate practice patterns and treatment outcomes in patients with mCRPC treated at a community practice (CP) compared with those treated at an academic center (AC). METHODS: This retrospective review included 200 adult mCRPC patients receiving radium-223 between January 2014 and June 2017. The primary endpoint, OS, was estimated from the date of radium-223 initiation. Secondary outcomes included a comparison of baseline characteristics, reasons for initiation and discontinuation of radium-223, and treatment sequencing. A subset analysis of OS based on the number of radium-223 doses and on sequencing of radium-223 either before or after chemotherapy was also conducted. RESULTS: Most patients were treated at a CP (57%). Patients treated at CP sites were significantly older (74.9 vs. 71.9 years; p = .031) and had more comorbidities (Klabunde score 1.1 vs. 0.7; p = .020) than those in an AC but initiated treatment within a shorter period of time from diagnosis of mCRPC (1.3 vs. 1.9 years; p < .001) and received a greater mean number of radium-223 doses (5.4 vs. 4.8; p = .001). There were no observed differences in OS between CPs versus ACs (21.6 vs. 20.7 months; p = .306). Overall, patients who received 5-6 doses versus 1-4 doses of radium-223 had a longer median OS (23.3 vs. 6.4 months; p < .001). The most common reason for discontinuation in patients who did not complete treatment was disease progression. Overall, 43% of patients received radium-223 monotherapy and 57% concurrently with other agents. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients received radium-223 concurrently with abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide and were able to complete 5-6 doses of radium-223. Despite differences in the populations and treatment patterns, no survival differences between patients treated in ACs versus CPs were observed. Additional real-world data are needed to validate these findings.

Budget impact analysis of darolutamide for treatment of nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Darolutamide, a structurally distinct androgen receptor inhibitor approved for the treatment of men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), has been shown to increase metastasis-free survival among men with nmCRPC compared with placebo. This treatment has a novel chemical structure that may also have safety, tolerability, and efficacy advantages for men with nmCRPC. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the projected budget impact of including darolutamide on a U.S. payer formulary as a treatment option for men with nmCRPC. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed to evaluate darolutamide for nmCRPC for a hypothetical 1-million-member plan over a 5-year period. Costs (drug acquisition, drug administration, and treatment-related adverse events [AEs]) were estimated for 2 scenarios: with and without darolutamide treatment for nmCRPC. The budget impact of darolutamide was calculated as the difference in costs for these 2 scenarios. An analysis for high-risk nmCRPC also was conducted. The model included treatments recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (e.g., apalutamide and enzalutamide) and potential comparators that are used but are not specifically indicated for nmCRPC. All treatments were assumed to be administered in combination with a weighted average androgen deprivation therapy comparator (consisting of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone [LHRH] agonists, LHRH antagonists, and first-generation antiandrogens). Market share estimates were derived from interviews with physicians treating men with nmCRPC. The model includes grade 3-4 AEs, and the rates were obtained from clinical trial data. Costs were taken from publicly available sources and varied in a one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: For a plan with 1 million lives, there were approximately 90 incident cases of nmCRPC (46 high risk) each year, with 332 (109 high risk) treatment-eligible cases by year 5. Darolutamide's market share increased from 3.6% in year 1 to 18% in year 5. Given the utilization of other agents, introducing darolutamide along with other targeted therapies was predicted to increase the total budget by $158,640 ($0.0132 per member per month [PMPM]) in year 1, which decreased over time to a cost savings of $149,240 ($0.0124 PMPM) by year 5. The scenario with darolutamide showed reduced AE costs each year. Similar results were observed for the high-risk nmCRPC population. CONCLUSIONS: Adding darolutamide to a U.S. payer formulary for the treatment of nmCRPC can result in a manageable increase in the budget that is partly offset by AE costs in the first 4 years, followed by a cost savings by year 5. DISCLOSURES: This study was conducted by RTI Health Solutions under the direction of Bayer U.S. and was funded by Bayer U.S., which was involved in the design of the study; collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; writing of the report; and the decision to submit the report for publication. Miles and Purser (and/or their institutions) are employees of RTI Health Solutions and received research funding from Bayer U.S. to develop the budget impact model. Appukkuttan and Farej are employees of Bayer U.S. Wen was an employee of Bayer U.S. at the time of the study. This study was presented as a poster at the AMCP Virtual Learning Event, April 20-24, 2020.

Treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer with radium-223: a retrospective study at a US tertiary oncology center.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for optimal sequencing of radium-223 and chemotherapy for metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) do not exist. This study evaluated treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) among patients with mCRPC treated with radium-223 in an academic clinical setting. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of bone metastases-predominant mCRPC patients treated with radium-223. Treatment patterns from 2013 to 2018 were evaluated in patients treated with radium-223 pre- vs. post-chemotherapy. OS was examined using Kaplan-Meier medians and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: In total, 220 patients were treated with radium-223 (64 pre-chemotherapy, 83 post-chemotherapy, 73 no chemotherapy). Mean radium-223 injections per patient was 5.3 and 4.3 in the pre- vs. post-chemotherapy cohorts, respectively (p < 0.001). The number of chemotherapy cycles was similar for chemotherapy given pre- or post-radium-223. Mean line of mCRPC therapy of radium-223 was 3rd and 5th when given pre- and post-chemotherapy, respectively (p < 0.001). 41.8% patients were treated with radium-223 in combination with another mCRPC therapy, commonly abiraterone acetate (43.5%) or enzalutamide (52.2%). The majority received combination therapy for the duration of radium-223 treatment; 20.7% started another agent after radium-223 initiation; 20.7% initiated radium-223 while on established therapy. Median OS from first mCRPC treatment was 39.4 months (95% CI 33.0, 48.8) for patients with radium-223 pre-chemotherapy vs. 37.4 months (95% CI 32.0, 43.5) post-chemotherapy (and 35.2 months [95% CI 27.9, 43.3] vs. 32.0 months [95% CI 26.9, 36.0] for patients with radium-223 combination vs. monotherapy). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis of patients treated with radium-223 demonstrates that administration of radium-223 pre-chemotherapy increased likelihood of completion of radium-223 treatment. Radium-223 given pre- or post-chemotherapy and with or without combination therapy did not result in significant differences in OS. Additional studies are needed to determine the optimal sequencing strategy of mCRPC in the modern era.

Patient and caregiver benefit-risk preferences for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Recently approved second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC) have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to examine how nmCRPC patients and caregivers perceive the benefits versus risks of these new treatments. METHODS: An online DCE survey with 14 treatment choice questions was administered to nmCRPC patients and caregivers. Each choice question compared two hypothetical medication profiles varying in terms of 5 safety attributes (risk or severity of adverse events [AEs]: fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, serious fall, and serious fracture) and two efficacy attributes (duration of overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression). Random parameters logit models were used to estimate each attribute's relative importance. We also estimated the amounts of OS that respondents were willing to forego for a reduction in AEs. RESULTS: In total, 143 nmCRPC patients and 149 caregivers viewed the AEs in following order of importance (most to least): serious fracture, serious fall, cognitive problems, fatigue, and skin rash. On average, patients were willing to trade 5.8 and 4.0 months of OS to reduce the risk of serious fracture and fall, respectively, from 3% to 0%; caregivers were willing to trade 6.6 and 5.4 months of OS. CONCLUSIONS: nmCRPC patients and caregivers preferred treatments with lower AE burdens and were willing to forego OS to reduce the risk and severity of AEs. Our results highlight the importance of carefully balancing risks and benefits when selecting treatments in this relatively asymptomatic population.

Physician preferences for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Recent approvals of second-generation androgen receptor inhibitors (SGARIs) have changed the treatment landscape for non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). These SGARIs have similar efficacy but differ in safety profiles. We used a discrete choice experiment to explore how United States physicians make treatment decisions between adverse events (AEs) and survival gains in nmCRPC, a largely asymptomatic disease. METHODS: Treating physicians (n = 149) participated in an online survey that included 14 treatment choice questions, each comparing 2 hypothetical treatment profiles, which varied in terms of 5 safety and 2 efficacy attributes. We described safety attributes (fatigue, skin rash, cognitive problems, falls, and fractures) in terms of severity and frequency, and efficacy attributes (overall survival [OS] and time to pain progression) in terms of duration of effect. We used a random parameters logit model to estimate preference weights and importance scores for each attribute. We also estimated the amount of survival gain physicians were willing to trade for a reduction in specific AEs between treatment options. RESULTS: Physicians placed more importance on survival than on time to pain progression, and viewed a reduction in cognitive problems from severe to none, a reduction in risk of a serious fracture from 8% to none, and a reduction in fatigue from severe to none as the most important safety attributes. Physicians were willing to forego 9.1 and 6.6 months of OS, respectively, to reduce cognitive problems and fatigue from severe to mild-to-moderate. To reduce the risk of a serious fracture from 8 to 5% and 5% to none, physicians were willing to trade 3.9 and 5.3 months of OS, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians were willing to trade substantial amounts of survival to avoid AEs between hypothetical treatments. These results emphasize the importance of carefully balancing therapies' benefits and risks to ultimately optimize the overall quality of nmCRPC patients' survival. Nonetheless, it is noted that the results from the study sample of 149 physicans may not be representative of the viewpoints of all nmCRPC-treating physicians.

Follicular lymphoma treatment patterns between 2000 and 2014: a SEER-Medicare analysis of elderly patients.

Aim: Characterize follicular lymphoma (FL) treatment patterns among elderly patients using a dataset with longer follow-up time. Materials & methods: Using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data, we identified patients diagnosed with FL between 2000 and 2013 with claims data until 2014. We investigated the treatments received and assigned them to lines of treatment. Results: We identified 10,238 elderly patients. Over a 4.7-year median follow-up, 78% of the patients received at least first-line treatment. Fewer individuals received second-line (47%) and third-line (30%) treatments. RCHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone), RCVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisolone) and rituximab monotherapy were the most common treatment regimens. Conclusion: One in five elderly patients did not receive FL-directed therapy. The most common treatment regimens were limited to RCHOP, RCVP and rituximab monotherapy.

Patient-level Factors Associated With the Initial Management of Older Adults Diagnosed With Follicular Lymphoma: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluated patient-level factors associated with the initial management of older adults diagnosed with follicular lymphoma (FL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare (SEER-Medicare) data; we identified 11,500 beneficiaries aged ≥ 66 years, diagnosed with FL between 2000 and 2013. A logistic regression model was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (AORs) for factors associated with the receipt of active treatment versus watchful waiting (WW) as an initial management strategy. A multinomial logistic regression model was used to predict factors associated with receipt of specific active treatments, namely chemoimmunotherapy, rituximab monotherapy, chemotherapy, or radiation as compared with WW. RESULTS: Overall, the initial management strategies adopted were WW (49%), chemoimmunotherapy (25%), radiation (10%), rituximab monotherapy (9%), and chemotherapy (7%). In reference to WW, grade III FL (AOR, 2.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99-2.46), increasing disease stage (Stage IV AOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.62-2.00), and use of preventive services (AOR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.30) were associated with increased odds of active treatment receipt. Age > 80 years (AOR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.87), Non-Hispanic African-American race (AOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.80), and state buy-in coverage (AOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.94) were associated with decreased odds of active treatment receipt. In reference to WW, the multinomial logistic regression model displayed differences in the receipt of rituximab-based therapies by age and comorbidity burden. Non-Hispanic African-American race and state buy-in coverage were associated with decreased odds of receiving rituximab-based therapies. CONCLUSION: The present analysis identifies disparities in the initial management of older adults with FL owing to race and socioeconomic status. Future research should examine implications for subsequent treatment and health outcomes.

Costs associated with follicular lymphoma among individuals diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a longitudinal analysis using SEER-Medicare data.

There is limited information on the cost burden associated with follicular lymphoma (FL) and how it compares to other non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) subtypes. We examined the direct medical costs associated with FL and estimated the incremental 3-year cost of FL compared to other NHL subtypes. Using the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset, we identified 16,691 NHL patients aged 66 years or older who were diagnosed with NHL between 2007 and 2013. The mean 3-year cost among the full NHL sample was $120,120 (standard error (SE) 839). The mean 3-year cost per patient was $114,443 (SE 1738) for FL and $121,402 (SE 950) for non-FL subtypes. The incremental 3-year cost of FL compared to non-FL was US$-5458 (95% confidence interval: US$-9325 to US$-1590). Longitudinally, FL was less costly than other NHL subtypes in the first year only, and became more expensive in the second and third years.

A Retrospective Claims Analysis of Advanced Prostate Cancer Costs and Resource Use.

BACKGROUND: Castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is associated with high costs and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). OBJECTIVE: This study followed patients with CRPC through their continuum of care and analyzed claims data regarding treatments, total HCRU, and costs, both before and after metastasis diagnosis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients with newly diagnosed metastatic CRPC (mCRPC) in the USA was identified from the Truven Health MarketScan database from January 2009 to March 2015. The mCRPC algorithm employed International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes for prostate cancer (pre-index) and secondary metastatic disease (index date) and a subsequent claim for a US FDA-approved treatment for mCRPC. Patient inclusion required evidence of surgical or pharmacological castration and no evidence of bone-targeted treatments during the baseline period while evaluating continuous enrollment 25 months pre-index and 6 months post-index. Treatment patterns were assessed during pre- and post-index periods; HCRU and costs were annualized for comparison purposes regarding both pre- and post-index timeframes. RESULTS: Among 261 patients with mCRPC (mean age 72 years), the most common treatments during the pre-index period were bicalutamide (90.04%), leuprolide (81.99%), abiraterone (22.22%), docetaxel (20.69%), and ketoconazole (18.01%). Mean per-patient-per-year (PPPY) all-cause annualized healthcare costs significantly increased from $US35,102.55 in the pre-index nonmetastatic CRPC (nmCRPC) period to $US156,499.89 after metastasis diagnosis (mCRPC). Mean PPPY inpatient admissions and emergency department visits increased from 0.20 to 1.36 and from 0.63 to 1.56, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Average yearly costs and HCRU were four times higher following mCRPC diagnosis, indicating a need for appropriate management strategies to optimize the potential delay of disease progression among patients with nmCRPC.

Survival benefit associated with treating follicular lymphoma in patients 80 years or older.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the overall survival benefit associated with follicular lymphoma (FL)-directed therapy among patients diagnosed with FL at 80+ years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset to identify patients 80+ years, diagnosed with FL between 2000 and 2013. We identified FL-directed treatments based on published guidelines. We utilized a propensity-score matched sample to compare treated and untreated groups who had similar observed characteristics. We reported the median overall survival time and the 3-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) of the study groups as well as the hazard ratio (HR) of death associated with treatment receipt. RESULTS: We identified 3705 older patients with FL (mean [SD] age, 84 [3.6] years). Over a median follow-up of 2.9 years, 68% of the sample received FL-directed therapy and the most common regimen was rituximab monotherapy (N = 768, 21%). The matched sample included 2306 patients. The median overall survival for the treated group was 4.31 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.00-4.61) compared to 2.86 years (95% CI, 2.59-3.16) for the untreated group. The 3-year RMST for the treated group was 2.36 years (95% CI, 2.30-2.41), while it was 2.05 years (95% CI, 1.98-2.11) for the untreated group. Treatment was associated with a 23% reduction in the hazards of death (HR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.70-0.85; p < .001). CONCLUSION: FL-directed therapy was associated with improved survival among patients diagnosed with FL at 80+ years. These findings can support treatment decision-making for individuals diagnosed with FL at older ages.

A Budget Impact Analysis of the Introduction of Copanlisib for Treatment of Relapsed Follicular Lymphoma in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Copanlisib was recently granted accelerated approval by the FDA for the treatment of adult patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL) after 2 previous systemic therapies. It is important to assess the effect that this and other changes in the treatment landscape of relapsed FL have on a payer's budget to inform formulary decisions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the budget impact associated with the addition of copanlisib to a formulary as third- or higher-line treatment for adult patients with relapsed FL who have received at least 2 previous systemic therapies, from the perspective of a U.S. third-party payer. METHODS: A budget impact model was developed over a 1-year horizon. The model considered a hypothetical population of 1 million people enrolled in a commercial health plan; patients with relapsed FL were identified based on epidemiology data. Treatments included copanlisib and approved and off-label therapies used for management of relapsed FL. Treatment distributions within the target population were based on a market research survey. Drug acquisition, administration, prophylaxis, and monitoring costs were based on prescribing information, clinical trials, literature, and expert opinion. All costs were inflated to 2017 U.S. dollars. Total costs were compared between 2 scenarios, 1 without and 1 with copanlisib on a formulary. A deterministic sensitivity analysis (DSA) was conducted to evaluate the robustness of the model. RESULTS: Within the 1 million-member health care plan, 18 patients had relapsed FL and had received at least 2 previous systemic therapies. Over 1 year, the addition of copanlisib and an increase in the use of obinutuzumab + bendamustine (from 9.0% without copanlisib to 13.1% with copanlisib) and lenalidomide + rituximab (from 0.3% to 12.0%) were estimated to increase drug acquisition costs by $238,536, drug administration and prophylaxis costs by $3,565, and monitoring costs by $539. The increase in total budget was $242,641, corresponding to $0.02 per member per month; 21.8% of this increase was attributable to copanlisib, 12.9% to obinutuzumab + bendamustine, and 65.3% to lenalidomide + rituximab. Results were generally robust in the DSA. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 1-year period, the model found that the addition of copanlisib to a formulary resulted in a small increase in total budget of $242,641, corresponding to $0.02 per patient per month and taking into account a concurrent increase in the use of obinutuzumab + bendamustine and lenalidomide + rituximab. Therefore, adding copanlisib to a formulary appears to be an affordable option for payers. Further studies should be conducted to more comprehensively assess the clinical and economic implications of adding copanlisib to the treatment armamentarium of relapsed FL. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. The study sponsor was involved in study design, data interpretation. and data review. All authors contributed to the development of the manuscript and maintained control over the final content. Appukkuttan, Yaldo, Gharibo, and Babajanyan report employment with Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals at the time of this study. Duchesneau, Zichlin, Bhak, and Duh report employment with Analysis Group, which received research funds from Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals for work on this study. A synopsis of the current research was presented in poster format at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; April 23-26, 2018; Boston, MA.

Costs and Healthcare Resource Utilization Associated with Hospital Admissions of Patients with Metastatic or Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Limited published information exists that compares the costs of metastatic prostate cancer with nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Although most research has focused on the costs of metastatic prostate cancer, delaying metastases in patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer can reduce or delay healthcare resource utilization and any associated expenditures. OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs and healthcare resource utilization of patients with metastatic or nonmetastatic prostate cancer who were receiving care in an inpatient or an outpatient hospital setting. METHODS: Claims from between June 2010 and September 2016 of patients with metastatic or nonmetastatic prostate cancer were retrospectively identified from the Premier Healthcare Database. Patients with a primary diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of the prostate in the inpatient or outpatient setting during the study period were included. Admissions were categorized as metastatic or nonmetastatic prostate cancer based on the presence or absence of an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and/or ICD-10-CM code for metastatic prostate cancer on discharge. Patients with a secondary diagnosis of distant skeletal, lymph node, or visceral metastasis or who received ≥1 treatments indicative of bone metastasis on the same admission were considered to have metastatic prostate cancer. RESULTS: The study included prostate cancer admissions totaling 78,667 inpatient (4576 with metastatic disease) and 874,366 outpatient (71,545 with metastatic disease) admissions. Among the metastatic prostate cancer inpatient admissions, 72.6% of the patients were aged ≥65 years (mean age, 72 years for metastatic disease vs 63 years for nonmetastatic disease) and approximately 77.5% of these patients had bone metastases. The mean total cost per inpatient admission was $12,324 (standard deviation [SD], $13,506) for metastatic prostate cancer versus $10,987 (SD, $6912) for nonmetastatic disease. The mean total cost per outpatient admission was $1627 (SD, $6182) for metastatic versus $909 (SD, $3458) for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study demonstrate the increased economic burden associated with hospital admissions, particularly inpatient admissions, for patients with metastases compared with patients without metastases. In addition to the clinical burden on patients, these findings further highlight the importance of implementing treatment strategies that can delay progression to metastatic prostate cancer and subsequent increases in healthcare resource utilization and cost.