Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Triptorelin, Goserelin, and Leuprolide in the Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer: A Societal Perspective.

OBJECTIVES: Metastatic prostate cancer is the most common malignant cancer and the second leading cause of death due to various types of cancer among men after lung cancer. This study aimed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of triptorelin, goserelin, and leuprolide in the treatment of the patients with metastatic prostate cancer from the societal perspective in Iran in 2020. METHODS: This is a cost-effectiveness study in which a 20-year Markov transition modeling was applied. In this study, local cost and quality-of-life data of each health state were gathered from cohort of patients. The TreeAge pro 2020 and Microsoft Excel 2016 software were used to simulate cost-effectiveness of each treatment in the long term. The one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed to measure robustness of the model outputs. RESULTS: The findings indicated that the mean costs and utility gained over a 20-year horizon for goserelin, triptorelin, and leuprolide treatments were $ 13 539.13 and 6.365 quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), $ 18 124.75 and 6.658 QALY, and $ 26 006.92 and 6.856 QALY, respectively. Goserelin was considered as a superior treatment option, given the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the study outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: According to the results of the present study, goserelin was the most effective and cost-effective strategy versus 2 other options. It could be recommended to policy makers of the Iran healthcare system to prioritize it in clinical guidelines and reimbursement policies.

Revisión de grupos farmacológicos en el tratamiento de cáncer de próstata / Review of pharmacological groups in the treatment of prostate cancer

EPIDEMIOLOGÍA: El cáncer de próstata es uno de los cánceres más comunes en los hombres en todo el mundo, con un estimado de 1.600.000 casos y 366.000 muertes al año. En los Estados Unidos, al 11 por ciento de los hombres se les diagnostica cáncer de próstata a lo largo de su vida, y la incidencia generalmente aumenta con la edad; Se estima que hay 268.490 casos y 34.500 muertes al año. La tasa de supervivencia general a cinco años es superior al 98 por ciento. Según los datos de GLOBOCAN1 al 2022 para El Salvador, el cáncer de próstata es el diagnóstico más frecuente dentro de la población masculina, siendo la 2da causa de diagnóstico de cáncer a nivel nacional, con 1392 casos nuevos para este año, representando el 33.1%; tiene una prevalencia a 5 años de 13.4 por 100, habitantes. Aproximadamente el 83 % de los cánceres de próstata se detectan cuando la enfermedad se encuentra únicamente en la próstata y los órganos cercanos (70 % local y 13 % regional). Para las personas diagnosticadas con cáncer de próstata que se ha diseminado a otras partes del cuerpo, la tasa de supervivencia relativa a 5 años es del 32 %2 . DIAGNÓSTICO: Enfermedad no metastásica3 : el diagnóstico de cáncer de próstata requiere un examen histológico del tejido obtenido mediante una biopsia de próstata. El cáncer de próstata no se puede diagnosticar basándose en el resultado del antígeno prostático específico (PSA), un examen físico, pruebas de laboratorio complementarias, estudios de imágenes o síntomas. Una biopsia puede mostrar cáncer de próstata, hallazgos precancerosos o benignos. Si la biopsia indica cáncer de próstata, se utilizan patrones arquitectónicos de las células en la muestra de biopsia para generar una puntuación de Gleason primaria y secundaria que luego se utiliza para definir el grupo de grado, un sistema de clasificación de cinco niveles para el cáncer de próstata (grupos GRADE de 1 a 5), que se correlaciona con el pronóstico y se utiliza para determinar enfoques de tratamiento para la enfermedad localizada según la estratificación del riesgo. METODOLOGÍA: Se ha realizado una búsqueda en las principales bases de datos bibliográficas, páginas web de agencias reguladoras, Guías de Práctica Clínica Internacionales, base de datos www.uptodate.com y Bibliografía Especializada de Referencia Médica. También se realizó una búsqueda manual en otras bases de datos bibliográficas (Cochrane, NIH, TRIP DATABASE), en buscadores genéricos de internet, agencias de evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias y financiadores de salud. Se priorizó la inclusión de revisiones sistemáticas, meta-análisis, estudios clínicos aleatorizados y controlados, guías de práctica clínica, evaluaciones de tecnología sanitaria, evaluaciones económicas y políticas de cobertura de otros sistemas de salud. Se brinda un resumen de la revisión rápida del material obtenido. CONCLUSIONES: El cáncer de próstata es uno de los cánceres más comunes en los hombres en todo el mundo; Según los datos de GLOBOCAN* al 2022 para El Salvador, es el diagnóstico más frecuente dentro de la población masculina, siendo la 2da causa de diagnóstico de cáncer a nivel nacional, con 1392 casos nuevos para este año, representando el 33.1%; tiene una prevalencia a 5 años de 13.4 por 100, habitantes. Cuando este se ha propagado a los ganglios linfáticos o a otras partes del cuerpo, hablamos de enfermedad metastásica; cuando necesita andrógenos (hormonas masculinas) para crecer y que, por consiguiente, deja de crecer cuando no hay andrógenos, se conoce como sensible a castración (CPHSm); cuando ya no hay respuesta completa al tratamiento de deprivación hormonal, se conoce como resistente a la castración (CPHRm); además, su nivel de riesgo y volumen se determinan mediante parámetros clínicos, estudios de imagen, hallazgos encontrados en biopsias y niveles de antígeno prostático específico (PSA); todos estos componentes influyen de manera directa en la toma de decisiones de la terapia a implementar en cada paciente al inicio del tratamiento, así como determinan la continuidad de este. En los listados institucionales de medicamentos se encuentran múltiples terapias para tratar esta afección, y se ha solicitado por parte de la especialidad de oncología la incorporación de diversos medicamentos para esta; sin embargo, al momento no hay un protocolo determinado de tratamiento el cual determine el uso de los fármacos ya existentes en el cáncer de próstata y sus diferentes estadios, tampoco que describa las diversas indicaciones que estos tienen, por lo tanto no hay un análisis específico y concreto de los medicamentos disponibles previo a la solicitud de incorporación de medicamentos nuevos. Con respecto a los costos de los medicamentos, Cabazitaxel y Apalutamida son los fármacos que representan mayores costos respectivamente; al hacer la proyección con el número de pacientes propuestos por especialidad se observa que todas las incorporaciones de estos medicamentos representarían un aumento muy importante en el costo de su uso teniendo en cuenta que no son monterapias, por lo que aumentaría aún más al realizar la sumatoria del total de fármacos usados en cada indicación; sin embargo, se expresó en revisión con jefatura de especialidad, que se considere las indicaciones precisas de cada fármaco para la estimación del número de pacientes en quienes se usarían los medicamentos ya que así el número estimado disminuiria, y se tomara como base las solicitudes actuales de medicamentos NILO; al realizar una nueva proyección con estos datos se observa una reducción significativa de estos, y además se puede sumar el beneficio a mediano plazo al mejorar la sintomatología, calidad de vida y por ende ingresos hospitalarios y los costos que estos conllevan. Los fármacos Apalutamida, Enzalutamida y Darolutamida se consideran convenientes; existen registros activos (1 para Apalutamida y Darolutamida, 3 para Enzalutamida) a nivel nacional; además al ser fármacos de administración vía oral, no necesitan el uso concomitante de esteroides y tampoco ingresos hospitalarios o accesos IM o EV para su administración; en el caso de cabazitaxel, de los fármacos evaluados, es el menos conveniente debido a la necesidad de cumplirse en el ámbito hospitalario, por personal capacitado, además de aumentar la necesitad de fármacos para contrarrestar efectos adversos y posibles transfusiones de hemoderivados; A pesar de lo anterior se consideró en conjunto con la Jefatura de Departamento de Oncología que al ampliar las indicaciones de Apalutamida, Abiraterona y el considerar la incorporación de Enzalutamida se puede dar la cobertura necesaria para todas las indicaciones de Cáncer de Próstata en los derechohabientes.

Longitudinal assessment of auxological parameters, adult height outcome and its determinants in leuprolide-treated Indian girls with idiopathic central precocious puberty.

OBJECTIVES: To assess auxological parameters, adult height outcome and its determinants in Indian girls with idiopathic central precocious puberty (iCPP) treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues (GnRHa). METHODS: Retrospective study. Inclusion: data on girls with iCPP from initiation to stopping GnRHa (n=179). Exclusion: boys, peripheral, organic central precocity. RESULTS: Mean age of starting GnRHa: 8.2± 1.1 years, duration: 2.8± 1.2 years. 11.7 % had attained menarche at first presentation. The difference between bone (BA) and chronological (CA) ages reduced significantly from 2.6± 0.9 years (onset) to 1.6± 0.8 years (cessation). Weight, BMI Z-scores increased (p<0.01), height Z-scores decreased (0.8 vs. 0.6; p<0.01), predicted adult height (PAH) and Z-scores improved by 3.5 cm, 0.5 SDS following treatment (p<0.01). Overweight/obese girls (vs. normal BMI) were taller, with more advanced BA at starting (height Z-score: 0.7 vs. 1.0, BA-CA: 2.2 vs. 2.9 years), stopping (height Z-score: 0.5 vs. 0.9, BA-CA: 1.4 vs. 1.9 years) treatment, but showed no difference in PAH at starting, stopping treatment. Adult height data (n=58) revealed 1.9 cm gain above target height. Adult height Z-scores significantly exceeded target height Z-scores (p<0.01). Mean adult height (157.1± 5.8 cm) crossed PAH at starting treatment (155.9± 6.4 cm) but remained 1.6 cm lesser than PAH at cessation. Adult weight, BMI Z-scores (-0.2± 1.3, -0.1± 1.2) were significantly lower (p<0.01) than those at stopping GnRHa. Height gain adjusted for age at starting GnRHa correlated negatively with height, weight, BMI, Tanner-staging, BA, FSH, Estradiol at treatment onset, BA at cessation, and correlated positively with treatment duration. CONCLUSIONS: GnRHa treatment in Indian girls with iCPP resulted in improved PAH, decelerated bone age advancement and growth velocity. Most girls achieved adult height within target range, surpassing PAH at treatment initiation. Lesser anthropometric, sexual, skeletal maturity, lower baseline FSH, estradiol, longer treatment duration, less advanced BA at stopping GnRHa may translate into better adult height outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of androgen deprivation therapy with relugolix for the treatment of advanced prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Relugolix treatment of advanced prostate cancer (APC), like other gonadotropin-releasing hormone-antagonists, results in rapid decrease in testosterone concentrations without the risk of flare, as seen in leuprolide. Despite this benefit over leuprolide, no economic evaluation assessment to ascertain the cost-effectiveness of relugolix has been conducted. Therefore, this study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with 120 mg relugolix against 7.5 mg leuprolide for the treatment of APC. METHODS: A Markov model was used to assess and compare the costs of APC treatment from a health care payer's perspective and the effectiveness of ADT with relugolix and leuprolide at the 3 lines of APC treatment among modified intent-to-treat patients. Relative progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were estimated. Outcomes measured in the analyses included costs of the drugs and therapies, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), cost-effectiveness acceptability, and probability curves. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed the ICER for ADT with relugolix to be US $49,571.1 per QALY. At the ICER value, the sensitivity analysis indicated that ADT with leuprolide was dominant in 100% of the simulations. ADT acceptance with relugolix was 100% when a willingness-to-pay threshold was set at US $100,000/QALY. At 5-years, the relative PFS and OS rates for relugolix at the first line of therapy were 72.7% and 86.0%, respectively, compared to 61.0% and 85.90% for leuprolide. CONCLUSION: Though the influence of adverse events was not considered in the analysis, ADT with relugolix was not a cost-effective choice for APC management. While the analysis revealed a slight chance of sustaining testosterone suppression with relugolix, ADT with relugolix provided no significant survival advantages over ADT with leuprolide. Therefore, this analysis confirms no need for further assessment of APC interventions to make informed decisions beneficial to the APC patients, oncologists, and other stakeholders.

Degarelix vs. leuprorelin for the treatment of prostate cancer in China: A cost-utility analysis.

Objective: To explore the cost-effectiveness of degarelix acetate for injection (degarelix) compared to leuprorelin in prostate cancer (Pca) castration treatment from Chinese healthcare system perspective. Methods: A Markov model, adapted from the one established in Finland was conducted for the cost-effectiveness analysis of degarelix and leuprorelin for Pca treatment. The main data were derived from global phase III clinical trials of degarelix (CS21), published study and expert surveys. Outcomes, utility and costs of prostate cancer patients were calculated on a 30-year time horizon. The CS21 study based population of intention-to-treat (ITT) population and three scenarios were modeled. Taking three times of the Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (242,928 yuan, 2021) as the acceptable threshold for cost-effectiveness. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed on key parameters, including transition probabilities, costs, utility, and discount rate to test the robustness of the model. Results: Base case analysis for ITT population revealed that total costs of degarelix and leuprorelin were 566,226 yuan and 489,693 yuan, while the total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were 5.19 and 4.51 during the 30-year time horizon, resulting an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 112,674 yuan/QALY which was 1.39 times the GDP per capita, lower than willingness-to-pay level of three times the GDP per capita. The results for scenario analyses revealed that compared to leuprorelin, degarelix for Pca treatment in China was cost-effective. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the model was most sensitive to price of 80 mg degarelix, utility of 1st-line therapy, hazard ratio of PSA recurrence, price of 3.75 mg leuprorelin, response rate of docetaxel per cycle, and discount rate of cost. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, compared to leuprorelin, the probability of degarelix to be cost-effective was 53 and 81% for willingness-to-pay threshold of one and three times the GDP per capita. Conclusion: Compared to leuprorelin, degarelix for prostate cancer treatment is cost-effective. Moreover, scenario, one-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that the model was robust.

Acetato de leuprorrelina subcutânea 45mg para tratamento de puberdade precoce central / Subcutaneous Leuprorelin Acetate 45mg for central precocious puberty treatment

INTRODUÇÃO: A puberdade precoce se refere ao desenvolvimento de características sexuais secundárias antes dos oito anos, no sexo feminino, ou antes dos nove anos de idade, no sexo masculino, sendo classificada como puberdade precoce central quando as características sexuais se desenvolvem por ativação precoce do eixo hipotálamo-hipófise-gonadal (HHG). Considerada uma condição rara, sua incidência é comumente relatada em torno de 1:5.000 a 1:10.000, sendo mais frequente no sexo feminino em uma proporção de 3 a 23 meninas: 1 menino, com o diagnóstico baseado no exame físico, exames laboratoriais e de imagem. Valores de pico do LH maiores que 5 UI/L após estímulo hormonal confirmam o diagnóstico. A antecipação da puberdade tem implicações psicossociais e na saúde a longo prazo substanciais, incluindo aumento de riscos de obesidade, hipertensão, diabetes tipo 2, doença isquêmica do coração, acidente vascular cerebral, câncer de mama e mortalidade cardiovascular. O uso de agonistas do hormônio liberador de gonadotrofina (GnRH) de longa ação com o objetivo de regredir ou estabilizar os sintomas da puberdade, reduzir a velocidade de crescimento para valores normais pré-púberes e diminuir o avanço da idade óssea é o tratamento de referência. De acordo com o Protocolo Clínico e Diretrizes Terapêuticas (PCDT) de Puberdade Precoce Central, os esquemas de tratamentos com agonistas de GnRH recomendados no SUS são: gosserrelina 3,6 mg subcutâneo (SC) a cada mês ou 10,8 mg a cada 3 meses; leuprorrelina 3,75 mg intramuscular (IM) a cada mês ou 11,25 mg a cada 3 meses, 7,5 mg IM a cada mês em caso de controle clínico e/ou laboratorial insatisfatórios, 3,75 mg IM para o teste diagnóstico; ou triptorrelina 3,75 mg IM a cada mês ou 11,25 mg a cada 3 meses; 7,5 mg IM a cada mês em caso de controle clínico e/ou laboratorial insatisfatórios. O documento vigente do PCDT brasileiro ressalta que não há superioridade terapêutica do uso trimestral sobre o mensal e, assim, o tratamento com triptorrelina ou leuprorrelina pode ser feito com qualquer uma das posologias. PERGUNTA: Os diferentes regimes de leuprorrelina apresentam equivalência em relação à eficácia e segurança no tratamento de pacientes com puberdade precoce central, com ênfase no regime de 45 mg subcutâneo a cada 6 meses? Evidências clínicas: A principal evidência disponível provém de um estudo clínico multicêntrico (25 locais em 6 países), não randomizado, aberto, de braço único com o objetivo de avaliar a eficácia e segurança do tratamento da puberdade precoce central com uso de acetato de leuprorrelina na dose de 45 mg por via subcutânea a cada 6 meses durante o seguimento de aproximadamente 1 ano (48 semanas). Ao todo, 64 crianças (60 do sexo feminino), idade média de 7,5 ± 0,1 anos, diagnosticadas com puberdade precoce central e sem tratamento prévio com GnRHa participaram do estudo. Como desfecho primário, no período de 6 meses, 87,1% (IC95%: 76,5% a 93,3%; n = 54; N = 62) das crianças alcançaram o critério de resposta de se atender a níveis de LH < 4 UI/L 30 minutos após a estimulação com GnRHa. No período de 12 meses, observou-se que 86,2% (IC95%: 75,5% a 93,4%; n = 50; N = 58) das crianças atingiram também o objetivo. Tanto a supressão de LH, como a redução da taxa média de crescimento foi persistente ao longo das 48 semanas de acompanhamento, saindo de 8,9 ± 1,7 cm/ano na semana 4 para 5,4 ± 0,5 cm/ano na semana 24 e 6,0 ± 0,5 cm/ano na semana 48. Os eventos adversos relacionados ao tratamento mais frequentes foram: dor no local da injeção (31%), nasofaringite (22%), pirexia (17%), dor de cabeça (16%), tosse (13%), dor abdominal (9%), eritema no local da injeção (9%), náusea (8%), constipação (6%), vômito (6%), infecção do trato respiratório superior (6%), broncoespasmo (6%), tosse produtiva (6%) e fogacho (5%). Após a análise do risco de viés com a ferramenta ROBINS-I e do nível de evidência dos desfechos críticos pelo sistema GRADE, considerou-se MODERADA (⊕⊕⊕⊝) a certeza na evidência de que o regime de 6 meses de leuprorrelina é eficaz e seguro no tratamento da puberdade precoce central em pacientes com idade igual ou superior a 2 anos. As principais limitações da evidência disponível dizem respeito à ausência de um grupo comparador em um estudo randomizado, fator igualmente limitante nas demais apresentações já disponíveis no SUS. Apesar de não haver um grupo controle e uma comparação direta ou indireta, os níveis de resposta são observados logo nas primeiras semanas de tratamento e foram mantidos ao longo do período de seguimento do estudo (48 semanas), com amplitude de intervalos de confiança de 95% de suas respostas semelhantes aos esquemas disponíveis no SUS. O nível de certeza para o desfecho de eventos adversos foi BAIXA (⊕⊕⊝⊝) por se tratar de um estudo com uma pequena amostra e eventos raros podem não ter sido identificados, o que reforça a necessidade do monitoramento do uso numa eventual disponibilização do tratamento a um número maior de pacientes. AVALIAÇÃO ECONÔMICA: Foi construído um modelo de custo-minimização baseado no pressuposto que os comparadores possuem a mesma efetividade. O estudo que baseou essa premissa não possui comparador e tem uma qualidade limitada. O resultado da avaliação econômica foi de uma economia média anual por paciente de R$ 2.598 e R$200,00 ao substituir a leuprorrelina de 11,25mg e 3,75mg respectivamente. Os valores da leuprorrelina de 3,75mg foram atualizados pelos valores de negociação no SIASG. Análise de impacto orçamentário: O impacto orçamentário foi construído com os resultados do modelo de custominimização. A população e os preços das alternativas propostas pelo demandante foram atualizados e adequados a realidade brasileira. Os resultados do modelo do demandante e das adequações fizeram o impacto orçamentário em cinco anos variar de uma economia de R$ 275.955.428,77 a R$153.746.138. MONITORAMENTO DO HORIZONTE TECNOLÓGICO: Não foram identificados medicamentos em desenvolvimento clínico para a indicação clínica. CONSIDERAÇÕES FINAIS: Quanto a evidência clínica, o estudo observou respostas favoráveis nos desfechos de eficácia com destaque para a supressão do hormônio luteinizante (LH). Não houve comparação a um grupo controle, tampouco foi construída uma indireta entre estudos. O risco de viés das evidências disponíveis é uma condição inerente ao contexto de condição rara e está também presente nas evidências das apresentações de leuprorrelina já incorporadas no SUS de (3,75 mg mensal e 11,25 trimestral), onde também não há ensaios clínicos de comparação direta. Tanto a avaliação econômica quanto o impacto orçamentário resultaram em economia de recursos para o SUS. CONSULTA PÚBLICA: realizada entre os dias 20/07/2021 e 09/08/2021, a Consulta Pública recebeu um total de 353 contribuições, sendo 66 pelo formulário para contribuições técnico-científicas e 287 pelo formulário para contribuições sobre experiência ou opinião de pacientes, familiares, amigos ou cuidadores de pacientes, profissionais de saúde ou pessoas interessadas no tema. Das 66 contribuições de cunho técnico-científico recebidas, 41 foram analisadas, já que as demais não apresentaram informação alguma (em branco) ou argumentação técnica sobre as evidências. Das 287 contribuições recebidas sobre experiência com a tecnologia ou opinião sobre o tema, 268 foram analisadas, já que as demais não apresentaram informação alguma (em branco). No total, 286 concordaram com a recomendação inicial da Conitec e 1 discordou. RECOMENDAÇÃO FINAL DA CONITEC: Os membros do plenário da Conitec, presentes na 101ª reunião ordinária da Conitec, no dia 01 de setembro de 2021, deliberaram por unanimidade, recomendar a incorporação no SUS do acetato de leuprorrelina subcutânea 45mg para tratamento de puberdade precoce central em pacientes com idade igual ou superior a 2 anos de idade. Além de ressaltados os benefícios acerca da vantagem posológica, que possibilitam maior adesão ao tratamento, não foram adicionadas informações durante a Consulta Pública que alterassem a recomendação preliminar. Foi assinado o Registro de Deliberação nº 662/2021. DECISÃO: Incorporar nova apresentação do acetato de leuprorrelina subcutânea 45mg para tratamento de puberdade precoce central em pacientes com idade igual ou superior a 2 anos de idade, no âmbito do Sistema Único de Saúde ­ SUS, conforme a Portaria nº 69, publicada no Diário Oficial da União nº 206, seção 1, página 76, em 03 de novembro de 2021.

Using medical claims database to develop a population disease progression model for leuprorelin-treated subjects with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer.

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a widely used treatment for patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa). However, duration of treatment response varies, and most patients eventually experience disease progression despite treatment. Leuprorelin is a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist, a commonly used form of ADT. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a biomarker for monitoring disease progression and predicting treatment response and survival in PCa. However, time-dependent profile of tumor regression and growth in patients with hormone-sensitive PCa on ADT has never been fully characterized. In this analysis, nationwide medical claims database provided by Humana from 2007 to 2011 was used to construct a population-based disease progression model for patients with hormone-sensitive PCa on leuprorelin. Data were analyzed by nonlinear mixed effects modeling utilizing Monte Carlo Parametric Expectation Maximization (MCPEM) method in NONMEM. Covariate selection was performed using a modified Wald's approximation method with backward elimination (WAM-BE) proposed by our group. 1113 PSA observations from 264 subjects with malignant PCa were used for model development. PSA kinetics were well described by the final covariate model. Model parameters were well estimated, but large between-patient variability was observed. Hemoglobin significantly affected proportion of drug-resistant cells in the original tumor, while baseline PSA and antiandrogen use significantly affected treatment effect on drug-sensitive PCa cells (Ds). Population estimate of Ds was 3.78 x 10-2 day-1. Population estimates of growth rates for drug-sensitive (Gs) and drug-resistant PCa cells (GR) were 1.96 x 10-3 and 6.54 x 10-4 day-1, corresponding to a PSA doubling time of 354 and 1060 days, respectively. Proportion of the original PCa cells inherently resistant to treatment was estimated to be 1.94%. Application of population-based disease progression model to clinical data allowed characterization of tumor resistant patterns and growth/regression rates that enhances our understanding of how PCa responds to ADT.

Health Care Utilization and Economic Burden in Patients with Central Precocious Puberty: An Assessment of the Commercially Insured and Medicaid Populations.

BACKGROUND: Central precocious puberty (CPP), early onset of puberty caused by the premature activation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis, is a rare disease affecting children of both sexes. There is limited evidence that quantifies the economic burden of CPP. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs among patients with CPP who were treated with gonadotropinreleasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, for those insured commercially and with Medicaid. METHODS: Eligible CPP patients for this retrospective cohort analysis were aged ≤ 12 years; were diagnosed between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2014; and had at least 1 prescription for an FDA-approved GnRH agonist: leuprolide or histrelin (first prescription = index date). CPP patients had to be continuously enrolled in the MarketScan Commercial or Medicaid Database for at least 12 months before and after the index date. Control patients were randomly selected from all eligible non-CPP patients and N:1 matched on demographic characteristics with up to 20 controls per case. Clinical comorbidities, HRU, and costs were compared between study cohorts. Health care costs were examined via multivariable analysis to adjust for baseline differences between patients and controls. Treatment patterns among CPP patients were also characterized. RESULTS: There were 1,236 CPP patients and 24,206 controls with commercial insurance and 673 CPP patients and 11,965 controls with Medicaid insurance who met the inclusion criteria. Across payers, the mean age of CPP patients ranged from 7.6 years (Medicaid) to 8.5 (commercial), and 80%-87% were female. The mean observed duration (SD) of treatment with any approved GnRH agonist was 1.51 (0.98) years for commercial patients and 1.22 (1.04) for Medicaid patients. The mean age of discontinuation among patients who ceased GnRH agonist treatment ranged from 8.7 to 9.6 years. In the first year post-index, CPP patients had a greater number of unique diagnosis codes, unique medications, and comorbid conditions than controls. They also had significantly higher all-cause and diseasemonitoring related HRU. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, CPP patients with Medicaid insurance spent 6.42 times more ($16,768 [$31,460] vs. $2,610 [$4,897]), and patients with commercial insurance spent 12.25 times more ($19,940 [$20,132] vs. $1,628 [$1,645]) on health care in the year following treatment initiation than matched controls. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CPP have substantially more comorbidities and greater HRU and costs than their non-CPP peers. DISCLOSURES: All funding for this study was provided by AbbVie, which participated in analysis and interpretation of data, drafting, reviewing, and approving the publication. All authors contributed to the development of the publication and maintained control over the final content. Soliman and Grubb are employed by AbbVie and hold stock in AbbVie. Bonafede and Nelson are employed by IBM Watson Health, which received funding from AbbVie to conduct this study. Klein is a paid consultant of AbbVie but was not compensated for any work on development of this manuscript for publication. Portions of this work were presented at Pediatric Academic Societies (PAS) 2018 Meeting, May 5-8, 2018, in Toronto, Canada, as a poster presentation titled "Examination of Economic Burden Among Commercially Insured Patients with Central Precocious Puberty (CPP)."

Cost-effectiveness of elagolix versus leuprolide acetate for treating moderate-to-severe endometriosis pain in the USA.

AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of elagolix versus leuprolide acetate in women with moderate to severe endometriosis pain. METHODS: A Markov model was developed. The efficacy of leuprolide acetate was derived from statistical prediction models using elagolix trial data. Model inputs were extracted from Phase III clinical trials and published literature. RESULTS: Compared with leuprolide acetate, elagolix generated positive net monetary benefit (NMB) assuming a payer's willingness-to-pay threshold of US$100,000 per quality-adjusted life year over a 1-year time horizon: US$5660 for elagolix 150 mg and US$6443 for elagolix 200 mg. The 2-year NMBs were also positive. CONCLUSION: Elagolix was cost effective versus leuprolide acetate in the management of moderate to severe endometriosis pain over 1- and 2-year time horizons. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses.

Acetato de leuprorelina (30mg) para el tratamiento de cáncer de próstata avanzado / Leuprorelin Acetate (30mg) for the advanced prostate cancer treatment

INTRODUCCIÓN: Este documento técnico se realiza a solicitud del Hospital Nacional Arzobispo Loayza, a través de la Gerencia Macro Regional Centro Medio del Seguro Integral de Salud. a) Cuadro clínico: En Perú, el cáncer de próstata (CaP) es el tipo de cáncer con mayor incidencia (30,4 por cada 100 000 habitantes) y mortalidad (14,9 por cada 100 000 habitantes) en la población masculina. Su tasa de detección temprana aún es muy baja y la mayoría de pacientes son diagnosticados en estadios avanzados de la enfermedad. La terapia de deprivación androgénica constituye la piedra angular en el tratamiento del CaP avanzado, siendo su objetivo lograr niveles de testosterona en rango de castración (usualmente <50 ng/dl). La castración puede ser quirúrgica, mediante orquiectomía bilateral o más frecuentemente farmacológica, mediante el empleo de agonistas de la hormona liberadora de hormona luteinizante (LHRH) como leuprorelina, goserelina, histrelina o triptorelina; antiandrógenos, como nilutamida, flutamida o bicalutamida; o antagonistas de la LHRH, como degarelix. b) Tecnología sanitaria: El acetato de leuprorelina es un agonista de la LHRH que inhibe la secreción de gonadotropina hipofisaria y suprime la esteroidogénesis testicular. El acetato de leuprorelina puede ser administrado una vez al mes a una dosis de 7,5 mg, cada tres meses a una dosis de 22,5 mg, cada cuatro meses a una dosis de 30 mg, cada seis meses a una dosis de 45 mg, y cada 12 meses a una dosis de 65 mg, en forma de implante subcutáneo. Entre sus eventos adversos (EA) destacan bochornos, cansancio, atrofia testicular, ginecomastia, náusea y reducción de la mineralización ósea. El acetato de leuprorelina fue aprobado por primera vez en 1989 por la Food and Drug Administration (FDA) de los Estados Unidos en la dosis de 7,5 mg de aplicación mensual. En Perú, esta dosificación se encuentra incluida en el Petitorio Nacional Único de Medicamentos Esenciales (PNUME). La formulación de acetato de leuprorelina de 30 mg de aplicación cada cuatro meses cuenta con aprobación de FDA desde 1997 y con un registro sanitario vigente en Perú. OBJETIVO: Describir la evidencia científica disponible sobre la eficacia y seguridad del uso de acetato de leuprorelina a dosis de 30 mg cada cuatro meses para el tratamiento de cáncer de próstata avanzado. METODOLOGÍA: Se formuló la siguiente pregunta PICO, P: pacientes adultos con cáncer de próstata avanzado; I: acetato de leuprorelina 30 mg; C: acetato de leuprorelina 7,5 mg; O: concentración de testosterona sérica, concentración de antígeno prostático, progresión tumoral, calidad de vida y eventos adversos. Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en Medline (Pubmed), The Cochrane Library y LILACS. Ésta se complementó con la búsqueda de evidencia en páginas institucionales de agencias gubernamentales y buscadores genéricos. Se priorizó la identificación y selección de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados controlados (ECAs), revisiones sistemáticas (RS) con o sin meta-análisis (MA) de ECAs, guías de práctica clínica (GPC), evaluaciones de tecnología sanitaria (ETS) y evaluaciones económicas (EE) de América Latina. La calidad de la evidencia se valoró usando las siguientes herramientas: AMSTAR 2 para RS, la herramienta propuesta por la colaboración Cochrane para ECAs y AGREE II para valorar el rigor metodológico de las GPC. RESULTADOS: Se identificaron cinco GPC que respondieron a la pregunta PICO de interés. No se identificaron ECAs, RS, ETS, ni EE de América Latina. En ausencia de estudios que comparasen las formulaciones de 7,5 mg y 30 mg de acetato de leuprorelina, describimos de manera referencial los hallazgos de dos series de casos prospectivos que evaluaron el uso de acetato de leuprorelina 30 mg, sin un brazo comparador. CONCLUSIONES: No se identificaron ECAs que comparen las formulaciones de 7,5 mg y 30 mg de acetato de leuprorelina para el tratamiento de CaP avanzado. En ausencia de estudios que comparen directamente las formulaciones de 7,5 mg y 30 mg de acetato de leuprorelina, se desconoce su eficacia y seguridad comparativa. A pesar que dos series de casos prospectivos informan 98% a 100% de pacientes con testosterona <50 ng/dl y 90% con un nivel <20 ng/dl, sin presencia significativa de EA graves tras ocho meses de tratamiento, estos hallazgos deben tomarse con cautela, debido a limitaciones importantes como la ausencia de un brazo comparador, de una asignación aleatoria de pacientes, de un cálculo muestral, entre otras limitaciones propias del diseño de los estudios. Las GPC recomiendan el uso de terapia de deprivación androgénica con agonistas de la LHRH como tratamiento de primera línea en CaP, sin preferencia sobre algún tipo particular de esta clase de medicamentos. La GPC incluidas obtuvieron un promedio global de calidad entre 68,5% y 79,6%.

Artificial Cycle with or without a Depot Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Agonist for Frozen-thawed Embryo Transfer: An Assessment of Infertility Type that Is Most Suitable.

The clinical outcomes of five groups of infertility patients receiving frozen-thawed, cleavage-stage embryo transfers with exogenous hormone protocols with or without a depot gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist were assessed. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on 1003 cycles undergoing frozen-thawed, cleavage-stage embryo transfers from January 1, 2012 to June 31, 2015 in the Reproductive Medicine Center of Wuhan General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Region. Based on the infertility etiologies of the patients, the 1003 cycles were divided into five groups: tubal infertility, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), endometriosis, male infertility, and unexplained infertility. The main outcome was the live birth rate. Two groups were set up based on the intervention: group A was given a GnRH agonist with exogenous estrogen and progesterone, and group B (control group) was given exogenous estrogen and progesterone only. The results showed that the baseline serum hormone levels and basic characteristics of the patients were not significantly different between groups A and B. The live birth rates in groups A and B were 41.67% and 29.29%, respectively (P<0.05). The live birth rates in patients with PCOS in groups A and B were 56.25% and 30.61%,respectively (P<0.05). The clinical pregnancy, implantation and on-going pregnancy rates showed the same trends as the live birth rates between groups A and B. The ectopic pregnancy rate was significantly lower in group A than in group B. We concluded that the live birth rate was higher and other clinical outcomes were more satisfactory with GnRH agonist cotreatment than without GnRH agonist co-treatment for frozen-thawed embryo transfer. The GnRH agonist combined with exogenous estrogen and progesterone worked for all types of infertility tested, especially for women with PCOS.

Drug therapy for adenomyosis: a prospective, nonrandomized, parallel-controlled study.

Objective To provide novel insights into the clinical treatment of adenomyosis. Methods Two hundred patients with adenomyosis were enrolled in this prospective, nonrandomized, parallel-controlled study with a 1-year follow-up in our hospital. Group 1 was treated with 3.75 mg leuprorelin acetate (LA) (n = 40), Group 2 was treated with 1.88 mg LA (n = 40), Group 3 underwent Mirena implantation (n = 40), Group 4 underwent Mirena implantation after treatment with 3.75 mg LA (n = 40), Group 5 underwent Mirena implantation after treatment with 1.88 mg LA (n = 20), and Group 6 received San-Jie-Zhen-Tong capsules alone (n = 20). Uterine volume, pain, cancer antigen 125 level, ovary function, adverse effects, and Mirena expulsion were evaluated. Results The uterine volume and pain scores were lower in the groups treated with 1.88 than 3.75 mg LA, but the lower dose was associated with significantly fewer hot flashes and sweating. The 1-year Mirena expulsion rate was higher in Group 3 than in Groups 4 and 5 (10.00% vs. 3.33%, respectively). Costs were significantly higher in Groups 1 and 4 than in Groups 2 and 5. Conclusion Administration of 1.88 mg LA may be an alternative therapy for Asian patients with adenomyosis. The combination of LA and Mirena could enhance the therapeutic effect. Registration number: ChiCTR-IPR-15005971.

Cost analysis of leuprorelin acetate in Japanese pre-menopausal breast-cancer patients: comparison between 6-month and 3-month depot formulations.

AIMS: The aim in this study is to evaluate economic value for leuprorelin acetate 6-month depot compared with leuprorelin acetate 3-month depot in Japanese pre-menopausal breast cancer patients from a societal perspective. METHODS: The cost analysis was conducted by estimating direct and indirect cost, and intangible costs associated with one 6-month injection compared with two 3-month injections. Claims data were used for the analyses of direct and indirect cost and Medical Fee Schedule Table for direct cost. Discrete choice experiments were conducted by web-based survey to determine the intangible costs. Another web-based survey was also conducted on premenopausal breast cancer patients with injections of leuprorelin acetate, to calibrate the results of discrete choice experiments. RESULTS: The medical costs saved for having one less injection in pre-menopausal breast cancer patients with leuprorelin acetate injection were JPY 6,183. The productivity loss saving was JPY 1,419. An estimation of intangible costs saved for having one less injection of leuprorelin acetate was JPY 58,430, which included the disbenefit due to pain (JPY 8,535), injection site reactions (JPY 44,051), waiting time (JPY 9,595), and subtracting value in medical consultation (JPY 3,751). The total cost saved for having one less injection was JPY 66,032. LIMITATIONS: The respondents from the internet panel provided by a survey company do not necessarily reflect a population of Japanese society. CONCLUSIONS: Leuprorelin acetate 6-month depot demonstrates a higher value than leuprorelin acetate 3-month depot through saving medical costs and loss of productivity, as well as intangible costs saved for having one less injection when treating pre-menopausal breast cancer patients. In the costs for treating with leuprorelin acetate, the percentage of intangible costs might not be negligible. The intangible costs will probably be actively evaluated to proceed to patient-centered healthcare in society.

Cost analysis of leuprorelin acetate in Japanese prostate cancer patients: comparison between 6-month and 3-month depot formulations.

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the economic value for leuprorelin acetate 6-month depot compared with leuprorelin acetate 3-month depot from a societal perspective in Japanese prostate cancer patients. METHODS: The cost analysis estimated the reduction in direct and indirect costs as well as intangible costs saved by having one less injection. Claims data were used for the analyses of direct and indirect costs reduction. A discrete choice experiment based on a web-based survey estimated the monetary value of the intangible costs for one injection. Another web-based survey of prostate cancer patients, who had received treatment with leuprorelin acetate injections, was carried out to calibrate the results of the discrete choice experiment. RESULTS: Reductions in medical costs and loss of productivity for having one less injection in prostate cancer patients receiving leuprorelin acetate were JPY 5,670 and JPY 1,723, respectively. Intangible costs saved by using a 6-month depot formulation instead of a 3-month depot formulation for the injection of leuprorelin acetate were estimated to be JPY 19,872, including the values for a reduction in pain (JPY 3,131), injection site reactions (JPY 11,545), waiting time (JPY 9,479), and subtracting the value of medical consultation (JPY 4,283). The total cost reduction for having one less injection was JPY 27,265. LIMITATIONS: The respondents from the internet panel provided by a survey company are not necessarily a representative population of Japanese society. CONCLUSIONS: Leuprorelin acetate 6-month depot has an advantage in monetary value in the reduction in medical costs, loss of productivity, and intangible costs for having one less injection in prostate cancer patients compared with leuprorelin acetate 3-month depot. In the costs for treating with leuprorelin acetate, the percentage of intangible costs might not be negligible. The intangible costs will probably be actively evaluated to proceed to patient-centered healthcare in society.

[Cost effectiveness of GnRH antagonists in patients with prostate cancer and cardiovascular risk : Comparative analysis against Leuprorelin by the Number Needed to Treat]. / Kosteneffektivität von GnRH-Antagonisten bei Patienten mit Prostatakarzinom und kardiovaskulärem Risiko : Vergleichende Analyse gegenüber Leuprorelin anhand der Number Needed to Treat.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) risk for patients with hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (PCa) and pre-existing CV disease. This risk seems to be different for the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists leuprolide and goserelin and GnRH antagonists, whereas the slightly more expensive GnRH antagonist shows a beneficial risk profile. The present study assesses the cost effectiveness of degarelix compared to leuprolide for PCa patients with increased CV risk. METHODS: This analysis is based on a pooled analysis of six phase III, randomized, controlled trials comparing the GnRH agonists leuprolide and goserelin with the GnRH antagonist degarelix. For the combined endpoint of CV events or death a superiority of degarelix was determined with a Number-Needed-to-Treat of 12. From the perspective of German statutory health insurance, this evaluation estimates and compares the additional drug costs of degarelix treatment to the cost of one (avoided) CV event. The CV event costs were estimated via emergency treatment and transportation, inpatient treatment, and rehabilitation. The difference of these two cost pools divided by 12 yields the average saving per patient and year. RESULTS: For every 12 PCa patients with CV history that are treated with GnRH antagonists to prevent one CV event, there will be additional drug costs in comparison with leuprolide treatment of € 3111 per year. Costs of € 8447 per year are prevented. Therefore, each patient with a history of CV who is treated with degarelix instead of a leuprolide generates savings of € 445 per patient and year. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to leuprolide, degarelix is cost effective for patients with increased CV risk.

Ulipristal acetate for pre-operative treatment of moderate-to-severe uterine fibroids in women of reproductive age in The Netherlands: cost minimization analysis and budget impact analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Ulipristal acetate has been found to be non-inferior to other pre-operative treatments of uterine fibroids, particularly leuprolide. The objective of this study was to assess the pharmacoeconomic profile of ulipristal acetate compared to leuprolide for the pre-operative treatment of moderate-to-severe uterine fibroids in women of reproductive age in The Netherlands. The analysis was performed and applied within the framework of the ulipristal acetate submission for reimbursement in 2012. METHODS: A decision model was developed to compare the total costs of ulipristal acetate compared to leuprolide, the standard care in The Netherlands. The target population of this study corresponded to the type of patients included in the PEARL II clinical trial; i.e. women of reproductive age requiring pre-operative treatment for uterine fibroids. Sensitivity analysis was implemented to assess uncertainties. Data regarding costs, effects, and other input parameters were obtained from relevant published literatures, the Dutch Healthcare Insurance Board, and expert opinion obtained by means of a panel of experts from several medical centers in The Netherlands. RESULTS: In The Netherlands, the total costs of ulipristal acetate and leuprolide were estimated at €4,216,027 and €4,218,095, respectively. The annual savings of ulipristal acetate were, therefore, estimated at €2,068. The major driver of this cost difference was the cost of administration for leuprolide. Sensitivity analyses showed that ulipristal acetate mostly remained cost-saving over a range of assumptions. The budget impact analysis indicated that the introduction of ulipristal acetate was estimated to result in cost savings in the first 3 years following the introduction. The results of this study were used in the decision on reimbursement of ulipristal acetate according to the Dutch Reference Pricing system in 2012. CONCLUSION: Ulipristal acetate was cost saving compared to leuprolide and has the potential to provide substantial savings on the healthcare budget in The Netherlands.

Analysis of Adherence, Persistence, and Surgery Among Endometriosis Patients Treated with Leuprolide Acetate Plus Norethindrone Acetate Add-Back Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis affects over 10 million women in the United States. Depot leuprolide acetate (LA), a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, has been used extensively for the treatment of women with endometriosis but is associated with hypoestrogenic symptoms and bone mineral density loss. The concomitant use of add-back therapies, specifically norethindrone acetate (NETA), can alleviate these adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: To compare adherence to and persistence with LA treatment and time to endometriosis-related surgery among women treated with NETA and women treated with LA plus other add-back therapies or LA only. METHODS: This retrospective analysis was conducted using Truven Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database. Women with a diagnosis of endometriosis (ICD-9-CM code 617.xx) who initiated LA (index date) in 2005-2011 were selected for inclusion. Additional requirements were 12 months of continuous enrollment pre- and post-index and no evidence of endometriosis-related surgeries pre-index or up to 30 days post-index; no pre-index use of estrogen or noncontraceptive hormones; and no diagnoses of uterine fibroids, malignant neoplasms, infertility, or pregnancy. Patients were characterized as using NETA; other add-back therapies (estrogens, progestins, or estrogen-progestin combinations); or no add-back therapy. Adherence to and persistence with LA were measured over the 6 months following the index date using outpatient medical and pharmacy claims. Patients were considered adherent if their proportion of days covered was greater than or equal to 0.80. Persistence was operationalized as time to discontinuation, defined as a continuous gap of > 60 days without LA on hand. Time to endometriosis-related surgery (laparotomy, laparoscopy, excision/ablation/fulguration, oophorectomy, and hysterectomy) was measured over the 12 months following the index date. Surgeries were identified from inpatient and outpatient medical claims using procedure codes. Outcomes were compared among cohorts using multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression models controlling for demographics and baseline clinical characteristics. RESULTS: The final sample included 3,114 women, with a mean age of 36.9 years. The majority of women used LA only with no add-back therapy (n = 1,963, 63.0%), while 15.1% (n = 470) used NETA, and 21.9% (N = 681) used other add-back therapies. During the 6-month follow-up, more patients in the LA plus NETA cohort were adherent to LA therapy compared with LA only (47.2% vs. 31.5%, P < 0.001), and fewer patients discontinued (37.9% vs. 59.6%, P < 0.001). Additionally, fewer patients underwent endometriosis-related surgery in the 12 months after LA initiation in the LA plus NETA cohort (12.6% vs. 16.9%, P = 0.021). In multivariable models, women who initiated LA plus NETA or LA plus other add-back therapies had a higher likelihood of being adherent to LA than LA only patients (OR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.55-2.36 and OR = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.63-2.34) and lower likelihood of LA discontinuation (HR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.46-0.63 and HR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.52-0.68). NETA patients had a lower surgery rate in the 12-month post-index period compared with other add-back patients (HR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.50-0.93) or LA only patients (HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.52-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: For women with endometriosis, treatment with LA and concomitant add-back therapies was associated with better adherence to and persistence with LA over the 6 months following initiation, compared with treatment with LA only. The increased adherence and persistence to LA may translate into decreased need for surgical intervention, although fewer endometriosis-related surgeries were only observed in the 12 months following LA initiation for patients using concomitant NETA add-back therapy. These results support an increased and earlier use of NETA add-back therapy among women who initiate LA. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by AbbVie, which also markets the endometriosis drugs Lupron and Lupaneta Pack. AbbVie participated in the study design, research, data collection, analysis and interpretation, writing, review, and approval of this publication. Soliman and Castelli-Haley are employees of AbbVie and may own AbbVie stock or stock options. Bonafede and Farr are employees of Truven Health Analytics, which received a research contract to conduct this study with and on behalf of AbbVie. Winkel is a clinical professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Georgetown University in Washington, DC, and has served in a consulting role on research to AbbVie for this project. An earlier version of the current research was presented at the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) 20th Annual International Meeting; Philadelphia, PA; May 2015. All authors participated in data analysis and interpretation and contributed to the development of the manuscript.

Treatment costs for advanced prostate cancer using luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists: a solid biodegradable leuprorelin implant versus other formulations.

AIM: To compare treatment costs with alternative luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist preparations and determine whether a leuprorelin solid implant is associated with potential cost savings. PATIENTS & METHODS: A hypothetical population of 1000 prostate cancer patients was apportioned between the three most commonly-prescribed LHRH agonist preparations. Differentiated annual costs for 1- and 3-monthly formulations were calculated for France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK (EU5) and Sweden, and compared with the leuprorelin solid implant. RESULTS: Compared with alternative formulations, leuprorelin solid implants had potential annual cost savings/1000 patients of €353,000 (EU5) and €699,000 (Sweden; 1-month formulations), and €259,000 (EU5) and €300,000 (Sweden; 3-month formulations). CONCLUSION: The leuprorelin solid implant was associated with potential cost savings compared with the most commonly used LHRH agonist preparations.

A cost-utility analysis of degarelix in the treatment of advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the treatment of advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer with degarelix compared to luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists in the UK using the latest available evidence and the model submitted to AWMSG. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness model was developed from the perspective of the UK National Health Service evaluating monthly injection of degarelix against 3-monthly leuprorelin therapy plus anti-androgen flare cover for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced (locally advanced or metastatic) hormone-dependent prostate cancer. A Markov process model was constructed using the patient population characteristics and efficacy information from the CS21 Phase III clinical trial and associated extension study (CS21A). The intention-to-treat (ITT) population and a high-risk sub-group with a PSA level >20 ng/mL were modeled. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis using the patient access scheme (PAS) price, degarelix was dominant compared to leuprorelin with cost savings of £3633 in the ITT population and £4310 in the PSA > 20 ng/mL sub-group. The chance of being cost-effective was 95% in the ITT population and 96% in the PSA > 20 ng/mL sub-group at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). In addition, degarelix remained dominant when PSA progression was assumed equal and only the benefits of preventing testosterone flare were taken into account. Treatment with degarelix also remained dominant in both populations when the list price was used. The additional investment required to treat patients with degarelix could be offset in 19 months for the ITT population and 13 months for the PSA > 20 ng/mL population. The model was most sensitive to the hazard ratio assumed for PSA progression between degarelix and leuprorelin and the quality-of-life (utility) of patients receiving palliative care. CONCLUSION: Degarelix is likely to be cost-effective compared to leuprorelin plus anti-androgen flare cover in the first-line treatment of advanced hormone-dependent prostate cancer.

Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing degarelix with leuprolide in hormonal therapy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.

Degarelix, approved in the USA in 2008, is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, representing one of the latest additions to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). ADT is used as first-line therapy for locally advanced or metastatic prostate cancer with the aim to reduce testosterone to castrate levels. Like other gonadotropin-releasing hormone-antagonists, degarelix treatment results in rapid decrease in luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and testosterone levels without the associated risk of flare. Using one registration trial for degarelix with leuprolide as the active control, a cost-effectiveness analysis with a Markov model and a 20-year time horizon found the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for degarelix to be US$245/quality-adjusted life years. Degarelix provides a cost-effective treatment for ADT among patients with locally advanced prostate cancer.