Cardiovascular events among patients with prostate cancer treated with abiraterone and enzalutamide.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is growing concern about the adverse metabolic and cardiovascular effects of abiraterone acetate (AA) and enzalutamide (ENZ), two standard hormonal therapies for prostate cancer. We analysed the risk of cardiovascular adverse events among patients treated with AA and ENZ. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used Kythera Medicare data from January 2019 to June 2023 to identify patients with at least one pharmacy claim for AA or ENZ. The index date was the first prescription claim date. Patients were required to have 1 year of data pre- and post-index date. New users excluded those with prior AA or ENZ claims and pre-existing cardiovascular comorbidities. Demographic and clinical variables, including age, socioeconomic status (SES), comorbidity score, prostate-specific comorbidities, and healthcare costs, were analysed . Propensity score matching was employed for risk adjustment. RESULTS: Of the 8,929 and 8,624 patients in the AA and ENZ cohorts, respectively, 7,647 were matched after adjusting for age, sociodemographic, and clinical factors. Between the matched cohorts (15.54% vs. 14.83%, p < 0.05), there were no statistically significant differences in any cardiovascular event after adjusting for these factors. The most common cardiovascular event in both cohorts was heart failure (5.20% vs. 4.49%), followed by atrial fibrillation (4.42% vs. 3.60%) and hypotension (2.93% vs. 2.48%). INTERPRETATION: This study provides real-world evidence of the cardiovascular risk of AA and ENZ that may not appear in clinical trial settings. Adjusting for age, baseline comorbidities, and SES, the likelihood of a cardiovascular event did not differ between treatment groups.

Microfluidics-Based Technologies for the Assessment of Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Castration-resistant prostate cancer remains a significant clinical challenge, wherein patients display no response to existing hormone therapies. The standard of care often includes aggressive treatment options using chemotherapy, radiation therapy and various drugs to curb the growth of additional metastases. As such, there is a dire need for the development of innovative technologies for both its diagnosis and its management. Traditionally, scientific exploration of prostate cancer and its treatment options has been heavily reliant on animal models and two-dimensional (2D) in vitro technologies. However, both laboratory tools often fail to recapitulate the dynamic tumor microenvironment, which can lead to discrepancies in drug efficacy and side effects in a clinical setting. In light of the limitations of traditional animal models and 2D in vitro technologies, the emergence of microfluidics as a tool for prostate cancer research shows tremendous promise. Namely, microfluidics-based technologies have emerged as powerful tools for assessing prostate cancer cells, isolating circulating tumor cells, and examining their behaviour using tumor-on-a-chip models. As such, this review aims to highlight recent advancements in microfluidics-based technologies for the assessment of castration-resistant prostate cancer and its potential to advance current understanding and to improve therapeutic outcomes.

The cost-effectiveness of germline BRCA testing-guided olaparib treatment in metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib targets the DNA repair pathways and has revolutionized the management of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Treatment with the drug should be guided by genetic testing; however, published economic evaluations did not consider olaparib and genetic testing as codependent technologies. This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of BRCA germline testing to inform olaparib treatment in mCRPC. METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis of germline BRCA testing-guided olaparib treatment compared to standard care without testing from an Australian health payer perspective. The analysis applied a decision tree to indicate the germline testing or no testing strategy. A Markov multi-state transition approach was used for patients within each strategy. The model had a time horizon of 5 years. Costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 5 percent. Decision uncertainty was characterized using probabilistic and scenario analyses. RESULTS: Compared to standard care, BRCA testing-guided olaparib treatment was associated with an incremental cost of AU$7,841 and a gain of 0.06 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was AU$143,613 per QALY. The probability of BRCA testing-guided treatment being cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of AU$100,000 per QALY was around 2 percent; however, the likelihood for cost-effectiveness increased to 66 percent if the price of olaparib was reduced by 30 percent. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate germline genetic testing and olaparib treatment as codependent technologies in mCRPC. Genetic testing-guided olaparib treatment may be cost-effective with significant discounts on olaparib pricing.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of enzalutamide in comparison to abiraterone in treatment of metastatic prostate cancer resistant to castration in Iran.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, enzalutamide and abiraterone have been widely used as treatments for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). However, the cost-effectiveness of these drugs in Iran is unknown. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of enzalutamide for the treatment of metastatic prostate cancer resistant to castration in Iran. METHODS: A 3-state Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of enzalutamide and abiraterone from a social perspective over 10 years. The clinical inputs were obtained from the meta-analysis studies. The direct medical costs were obtained from the tariffs of the healthcare system, while the direct non-medical and indirect costs were collected from the patients. The data of utilities were derived from the literature. In addition, sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the uncertainties. RESULTS: Compared with Abiraterone, enzalutamide was associated with a high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $6,260 per QALY gained. According to the one-way sensitivity analysis, ICER was most heavily influenced by the prices of enzalutamide and Abiraterone, non-medical costs, and indirect costs. Regardless of the variation, enzalutamide remained cost-effective. The budget impact analysis of enzalutamide in the health system during 5 years was estimated at $6,362,127. CONCLUSIONS: At current prices, adding enzalutamide to pharmaceutical lists represents the cost-effective use of the healthcare resources in Iran for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Real-world economic burden of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer before and after first-line therapy initiation.

AIMS: To describe healthcare costs of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) initiating first-line (1 L) therapies from a US payer perspective. METHODS: Patients initiating a Flatiron oncologist-defined 1 L mCRPC therapy (index date) on or after mCRPC diagnosis were identified from linked electronic medical records/claims data from the Flatiron Metastatic Prostate Cancer (PC) Core Registry and Komodo's Healthcare Map. Patients were excluded if they initiated a clinical trial drug in 1 L, had <12 months of insurance eligibility prior to index, or no claims in Komodo's Healthcare Map for the Flatiron oncologist-defined index therapy. All-cause and PC-related total costs per-patient-per-month (PPPM), including costs for services and procedures from medical claims (i.e. medical costs) and costs from pharmacy claims (i.e. pharmacy costs), were described in the 12-month baseline period before 1 L therapy initiation (including the baseline pre- and post- mCRPC progression periods) and during 1 L therapy (follow-up). RESULTS: Among 459 patients with mCRPC (mean age 70 years, 57% White, 16% Black, 45% commercially-insured, 43% Medicare Advantage-insured, and 12% Medicaid-insured), average baseline all-cause total costs (PPPM) were $4,576 ($4,166 pre-mCRPC progression, $8,278 post-mCRPC progression). Average baseline PC-related total costs were $2,935 ($2,537 pre-mCRPC progression, $6,661 post-mCRPC progression). During an average 1 L duration of 8.5 months, mean total costs were $13,746 (all-cause) and $12,061 (PC-related) PPPM. The cost increase following 1 L therapy initiation was driven by higher PC-related outpatient and pharmacy costs. PC-related medical costs PPPM increased from $1,504 during baseline to $5,585 following 1 L mCRPC therapy initiation. LIMITATIONS: All analyses were descriptive; statistical testing was not performed. CONCLUSION: Incremental costs of progression to mCRPC are significant, with the majority of costs driven by higher PC-related costs. Using contemporary data, this study highlights the importance of utilizing effective therapies that slow progression and reduce healthcare resource demands despite the initial investment in treatment costs.

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.

Radiobiological Assessment of Targeted Radionuclide Therapy with [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T in 2D vs. 3D Cell Culture Models.

In vitro therapeutic efficacy studies are commonly conducted in cell monolayers. However, three-dimensional (3D) tumor spheroids are known to better represent in vivo tumors. This study used [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-I&T, an already clinically applied radiopharmaceutical for targeted radionuclide therapy against metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer, to demonstrate the differences in the radiobiological response between 2D and 3D cell culture models of the prostate cancer cell lines PC-3 (PSMA negative) and LNCaP (PSMA positive). After assessing the target expression in both models via Western Blot, cell viability, reproductive ability, and growth inhibition were assessed. To investigate the geometric effects on dosimetry for the 2D vs. 3D models, Monte Carlo simulations were performed. Our results showed that PSMA expression in LNCaP spheroids was highly preserved, and target specificity was shown in both models. In monolayers of LNCaP, no short-term (48 h after treatment), but only long-term (14 days after treatment) radiobiological effects were evident, showing decreased viability and reproductive ability with the increasing activity. Further, LNCaP spheroid growth was inhibited with the increasing activity. Overall, treatment efficacy was higher in LNCaP spheroids compared to monolayers, which can be explained by the difference in the resulting dose, among others.

Longitudinal assessment of plasma androgen receptor copy number predicts overall survival in subsequent treatment lines in castration-resistant prostate cancer: analysis from a prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: Baseline plasma androgen-receptor copy number (AR-CN) is a promising biomarker for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) outcome and treatment response; however, the role of its longitudinal testing is unproven. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic role of AR-CN assessed before subsequent treatment lines in mCRPC patients. METHODS: A subgroup analysis of a prospective multicenter biomarker trial (IRSTB030) was carried out. Plasma AR-CN status (classified as normal or gain, cut-off value = 2) was assessed with digital PCR before each treatment line. RESULTS: Forty mCRPC patients receiving sequentially docetaxel, cabazitaxel and an AR signaling inhibitor (abiraterone or enzalutamide) were analyzed. At multivariate analysis, at each assessment overall survival (OS) was independently correlated with AR-CN status [first line: hazard ratio (HR) 4.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-10.5]; second line: HR 2.4 (95% CI 1.1-5.3); third line: HR 2.1 (95% CI 1.0-4.3)] and median prostate-specific antigen [first line: HR 4.4 (95% CI 1.8-10.9); second line: HR 3.4 (95% CI 1.6-7.2); third line: HR 2.5 (95% CI 1.2-5.6)]. In the three subsequent assessments, AR-CN status changed from normal to gain in 15 (38%) patients. These patients had longer OS (47 months) compared with patients presenting AR-CN gain from first assessment (36 months), but shorter than those maintaining normal AR-CN (69 months) (P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Plasma AR-CN correlates with survival not only at baseline (before first treatment), but also in the assessments before the following lines. Interestingly, AR-CN status may change from normal to gain across subsequent treatments in a significant number of cases, identifying a group of patients with intermediate outcomes. Longitudinal assessment of AR-CN status could represent a promising method to capture mCRPC intrinsic heterogeneity and to improve clinical management.

Image-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology for BRCA Mutation Assessment of PSMA-Positive Lymph Node Metastases in a Patient With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

ABSTRACT: A 64-year-old man with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer presented for prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT in preparation for 177 Lu-PSMA radioligand therapy. For precedent BRCA mutation assessment, fine-needle aspiration cytology of 2 PSMA-positive lymph node metastases was conducted. The acquired material was suitable for next-generation sequencing-based gene panel diagnostics and did not show a BRCA1 / 2 mutation, thus PSMA radioligand therapy was initiated. Fine-needle aspiration cytology of lymph node metastases may be a viable option in evaluating further therapeutic alternatives.

PSMA PET/CT for Response Assessment and Overall Survival Prediction in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Treated with Androgen Receptor Pathway Inhibitors.

We aimed to evaluate the role of prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) PET/CT for response assessment and outcome prediction in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs), including abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 30 ARPI-treated mCRPC patients who underwent 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT within 8 wk before (baseline) and 12 ± 4 wk after treatment initiation. Total PSMA tumor volume was calculated using the fixed threshold method (SUV ≥ 3). Patients were categorized as PSMA responders (PSMA-Rs) or PSMA nonresponders (PSMA-NRs) on the basis of both European Association of Urology/European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EAU/EANM) criteria and Response Evaluation Criteria in PSMA PET/CT (RECIP) 1.0. PSMA-R included patients with a complete response, a partial response, or stable disease, and PSMA-NR included those with progressive disease. On the basis of prostate-specific antigen (PSA), patients were classified as biochemical responders if PSA decreased by at least 50% and as nonresponders if it did not. The Φ-coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation of PSMA- and PSA-based responses. Survival analysis was performed using the Cox regression hazard model and the Kaplan-Meier method. Predictive accuracy was tested for both response criteria. Results: On the basis of PSMA PET/CT, 13 (43%) patients were PSMA-NR according to the EAU/EANM criteria and 11 (37%) patients were PSMA-NR according to RECIP 1.0. Significant correlations were observed between PSMA- and PSA-based responses for both criteria (Φ = 0.79 and 0.66, respectively). After a median follow-up of 25 mo (interquartile range, 21-43 mo), the median overall survival was significantly longer for PSMA-R than PSMA-NR (54 vs. 22 mo) for both the EAU/EANM criteria and RECIP 1.0, with hazard ratios of 6.9 (95% CI, 1.9-26; P = 0.004) and 5.6 (95% CI, 1.69-18.26, P = 0.005), respectively. No significant difference in predictive accuracy was found between the 2 criteria (C-index, 0.79 vs. 0.76, respectively, P = 0.54). Flare phenomena at the second PSMA PET study were not observed in our cohort. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that PSMA PET/CT is a valuable imaging biomarker for response assessment and overall survival prediction when performed at 3 mo after ARPI treatment initiation in mCRPC patients. Both proposed PSMA response criteria (EAU/EANM and RECIP 1.0) seem to perform equally well. No PSMA flare was observed. Prospective validation of these findings is strongly needed.

Prediction of Resistance to 177Lu-PSMA Therapy by Assessment of Baseline Circulating Tumor DNA Biomarkers.

177Lu-PSMA-617 and 177Lu-PSMA I&T (collectively termed 177Lu-PSMA) are currently being used for the treatment of selected metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with PSMA PET-positive disease, but biomarkers for these agents remain incompletely understood. Methods: Pretreatment circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) samples were collected from 44 mCRPC patients receiving 177Lu-PSMA treatment. Prostate-specific antigen responders and nonresponders were assessed relative to the ctDNA findings at baseline. Results: The ctDNA findings indicated that nonresponders were more likely to have gene amplifications than were responders (75% vs. 39.2%, P = 0.03). In particular, amplifications in FGFR1 (25% vs. 0%, P = 0.01) and CCNE1 (31.2% vs. 0%, P = 0.001) were more likely to be present in nonresponders. CDK12 mutations were more likely to be present in nonresponders (25% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.05). Conclusion: Our analyses indicate that ctDNA assays may contain specific biomarkers predictive of response or resistance for 177Lu-PSMA-treated mCRPC patients. Additional confirmatory studies are required before clinicians can use these findings to make personalized treatment decisions.

Plain language summary: Does the amount of time it takes for prostate-specific antigen to double affect how long men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer live and their healthcare costs?

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of a research article originally published in Clinical Genitourinary Cancer. The original article described the effect of rapidly rising prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels on how long men with a type of advanced prostate cancer live and their healthcare costs. The prostate is a part of the male body that helps make semen. PSA is a protein produced by the prostate that can show how advanced prostate cancer has become. One measure of prostate cancer growth is assessing how quickly a patient's PSA level doubles. This is known as the PSA doubling time (PSADT). People with a shorter PSADT usually have faster-growing prostate cancer compared with people who have a longer PSADT of more than 12 months (long PSADT). Researchers wanted to know if PSADT can predict cancer spread (known as metastasis) or death for people with a type of advanced prostate cancer called non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Researchers also wanted to know if PSADT can predict healthcare costs. This could help doctors choose the right treatment for their patients with nmCRPC. This was a real-world study, not a clinical trial. This means that researchers looked at what happened when men received the treatments prescribed by their own doctor as part of their usual healthcare treatment. In this study, researchers used insurance claim information. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: Researchers looked at information for 2800 men with nmCRPC. Six out of every 10 men (60%) had a long PSADT of more than 12 months. Researchers found that it took longer for the cancer to spread to other parts of the body in men with a longer PSADT than men with PSADT of 12 months or less. Researchers also found that men with a longer PSADT lived longer than men with PSADT of 12 months or less. The long PSADT group had fewer healthcare visits overall than men with PSADT of 10 months or less. Over time, it cost less to treat men with a long PSADT than men with PSADT of 10 months or less. Generally, if PSADT was shorter, patients tended to do worse. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: In this real-world study, researchers found that men with nmCRPC lived longer and had lower healthcare costs if they had a long PSADT of more than 12 months compared with men who had a shorter PSADT. Men with nmCRPC and a shorter PSADT may benefit from approved treatments that slow cancer spread and help them live longer. However, these treatments may have side effects and cost more than standard treatment. Doctors take all these things into account when choosing treatments for their patients. Most men in this study had a long PSADT of more than 12 months. Standard treatment may be the right choice for them because they are more likely to have better outcomes than men with a shorter PSADT.

Healthcare Costs in Men with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: An Analysis of US Medicare Fee-For-Service Claims.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and healthcare costs in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) in the US Medicare population. METHODS: A published claims-based algorithm was used to identify men with mCRPC in the fee-for-service Medicare population between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019. Unadjusted all-cause HRU (days) and healthcare costs paid by Medicare (medical and pharmacy) per patient per year (PPPY) are described for the periods before mCRPC diagnosis, after diagnosis, and from the start of first-line (1L), second-line (2L), and third-line (3L) therapy with mCRPC life-prolonging treatments to the start of subsequent therapy or end of follow-up/death. RESULTS: A total of 14,780 men with mCRPC were identified. After mCRPC diagnosis, 11,528 men initiated 1L mCRPC therapy, 6275 initiated 2L, and 2945 initiated 3L. All-cause medical HRU (days PPPY) increased after mCRPC diagnosis and from 1L through 3L treatment, particularly for outpatient care (pre-diagnosis, 10.4; 1L, 16.2; 2L, 18.9; 3L, 22.0) and physician/other visits (pre-diagnosis, 30.1; 1L, 46.5; 2L, 50.2; 3L, 56.9). Similarly, mean all-cause healthcare costs PPPY were $27,468 in the year before mCRPC diagnosis and increased over four fold to $124,379 after mCRPC diagnosis and continued to rise from start of 1L ($148,325) to 2L ($160,118) to 3L ($165,186) therapy. CONCLUSION: HRU and healthcare costs increased substantially following mCRPC diagnosis, and continued to increase even further through progression from 1L through 3L mCRPC therapy. These findings help to quantify the economic burden of mCRPC and to contextualize the economic value of treatments that delay disease progression.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of 7 treatments in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a public-payer perspective.

BACKGROUND: Recently, several new treatment regimens have been approved for treating metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer, building on androgen deprivation therapy alone. These include docetaxel androgen deprivation therapy, abiraterone acetate-prednisone androgen deprivation therapy, apalutamide androgen deprivation therapy, enzalutamide androgen deprivation therapy, darolutamide-docetaxel androgen deprivation therapy, and abiraterone-prednisone androgen deprivation therapy with docetaxel. There are no validated predictive biomarkers for choosing a specific regimen. The goal of this study was to conduct a health economic outcome evaluation to determine the optimal treatment from the US public sector (Veterans Affairs). METHODS: We developed a partitioned survival model in which metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer patients transitioned between 3 health states (progression free, progressive disease to castrate resistance state, and death) at monthly intervals based on Weibull survival model estimated from published Kaplan-Meier curves using a Bayesian network meta-analysis of 7 clinical trials (7208 patients). The effectiveness outcome in our model was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Cost input parameters included initial and subsequent treatment costs and costs for terminal care and for managing grade 3 or higher drug-related adverse events and were obtained from the Federal Supply Schedule and published literature. RESULTS: Average 10-year costs ranged from $34 349 (androgen deprivation therapy) to $658 928 (darolutamide-docetaxel androgen deprivation therapy) and mean QALYs ranged from 3.25 (androgen deprivation therapy) to 4.57 (enzalutamide androgen deprivation therapy). Treatment strategies docetaxel androgen deprivation therapy, enzalutamide androgen deprivation therapy docetaxel, apalutamide androgen deprivation therapy, and darolutamide-docetaxel androgen deprivation therapy were eliminated because of dominance (ie, they were more costly and less effective than other strategies). Of the remaining strategies, abiraterone acetate-prednisone androgen deprivation therapy was the most cost-effective strategy at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios = $21 247/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Our simulation model found abiraterone acetate-prednisone androgen deprivation therapy to be an optimal first-line treatment for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer from a public (Veterans Affairs) payer perspective.

Circulating Tumor DNA Biomarkers for Response Assessment in Prostate Cancer.

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) is measurable in the majority of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. Data indicate that ctDNA present at baseline can serve as a prognostic biomarker and changes in the ctDNA posttreatment can rapidly predict both time to progression and survival. See related article by Tolmeijer et al., p. 2835.

Treatment outcomes of radium-223 in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: An experience before National Health Insurance reimbursement in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND: Radium-223 (Ra-223), an α-particle-emitting isotope, inhibits bony metastases and prevents patients from skeletal-related events in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). We retrospectively reviewed the treatment response, predictive factors, and adverse events (AEs) of Ra-223 before the National Health Insurance reimbursement in a Taiwanese tertiary institute. METHODS: Patients treated with Ra-223 before January 2019 were enrolled and categorized into progressive disease (PD) and clinical benefits (CB) groups. Laboratory data before and after the treatment were collected, and spider plots concerning percentage changes of alkaline phosphatase (ALP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) were prepared and calculated statistically. CB/PD, baseline ALP, LDH, and PSA levels were also adopted as stratification factors for overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Among 19 patients included, 5 (26.3%) and 14 (73.4%) belonged to the PD and CB groups, respectively, with no significant difference observed in the baseline laboratory data. The percentage changes in ALP, LDH, and PSA levels after Ra-223 treatment were statistically significant among the two groups (ALP: CB 54.3 ± 21.4% vs PD 77.6 ± 11.8%, p = 0.044; LDH: CB 88.2 ± 22.8% vs PD 138.3 ± 49.0%, p = 0.046; PSA: CB 97.8 ± 61.7% vs PD 277.0 ± 101.1%, p = 0.002). The trends of LDH between the two groups in spider plot were separated significantly. There were no differences in the AEs between the two groups. CB had a longer median OS than the PD group (20.50 months vs 9.43 months, p = 0.009). Patients with LDH <250 U/L at baseline tended to have longer OS but without significance. CONCLUSION: The CB rate of Ra-223 was 73.7%. No predictive factor for treatment response was obtained from pretreatment data. The mean percentage changes in ALP, LDH, and PSA levels compared with baseline significantly differed between the CB and PD groups, especially the LDH levels. The CB and PD groups showed different OS, with LDH levels exhibiting the potential to predict OS.

Treatment Patterns, Clinical Outcomes, Health Care Resource Utilization and Costs in Older Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in the United States: An Analysis of SEER-Medicare Data.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer (PC) is more likely to develop in men ≥65 years old than in those <65 years old. This study aimed to generate real-world evidence on treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs among older patients with metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A claims algorithm based on treatments expected for mCRPC was used to identify men ≥65 years old with mCRPC in the SEER-Medicare data between 2007 and 2019. The index date was defined as the date of the start of first-line therapy (1L). Treatment patterns and all-cause and PC-specific HCRU and costs were measured in the 12 months preindex period and the postindex follow-up period. Time to next treatment or death (TNTD) and overall survival (OS) were assessed in the follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of 4758 patients met the eligibility criteria and received 1L treatment. Among these 1L patients, 57.4% subsequently received second-line (2L) treatment; among patients receiving 2L treatment, 49.3% subsequently received third-line (3L) treatment. Abiraterone, enzalutamide, and docetaxel were most common regimens in 1L (41.9%, 22.0%, 22.0%, respectively), 2L (33.3%, 32.7%, 13.6%, respectively), and 3L (17.9%, 25.1%, 22.3%, respectively). On average, patients had 1.2 inpatient admissions, 1.1 emergency room visits, and 27.6 outpatient visits per year during follow-up. The mean total all-cause and PC-related costs during the follow-up period were $111,060 and $99,540 per-patient-per-year, respectively. Median TNTD was 9.3, 6.5, and 5.7 months for 1L, 2L, and 3L, respectively. Median OS from the start of 1L treatment for mCRPC was 21.5 months. DISCUSSION: Among older patients with mCRPC, high attrition from 1L to subsequent lines of therapy was observed. Median TNTD was <1 year and median OS was <2 years. These results highlight a need to introduce more effective mCRPC therapies in 1L to improve clinical outcomes for older patients.

Understanding Prescribing Differences Between Urologists and Medical Oncologists in the Management of Advanced Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The availability of oral therapies for advanced prostate cancer allows urologists to continue to care for their patients who develop castration resistance. We compared the prescribing practices of urologists and medical oncologists in treating this patient population. METHODS: The Medicare Part D Prescribers data sets were utilized to identify urologists and medical oncologists who prescribed enzalutamide and/or abiraterone from 2013 to 2019. Each physician was assigned to one of 2 groups: enzalutamide prescriber (physicians that wrote more 30-day prescriptions for enzalutamide than abiraterone) or abiraterone prescriber (opposite). We ran a generalized linear regression to determine factors influencing prescribing preference. RESULTS: In 2019, 4,664 physicians met our inclusion criteria: 23.4% (1,090/4,664) urologists and 76.6% (3,574/4,664) medical oncologists. Urologists were more likely to be enzalutamide prescribers (OR 4.91, CI 4.22-5.74, P < .001) and this held in all regions. Urologists with greater than 60 prescriptions of either drug were not shown to be enzalutamide prescribers (OR 1.18, CI 0.83-1.66, P = .349); 37.9% (5,702/15,062) of abiraterone fills by urologists were for generic compared to 62.5% (57,949/92,741) of abiraterone fills by medical oncologists. CONCLUSIONS: There are dramatic prescribing differences between urologists and medical oncologists. A greater understanding of these differences is a health care imperative.

Effects of In-office Dispensing by Single-specialty Urology Practices on Management of Advanced Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: We examine changes in the volume of patients with advanced prostate cancer and prescriptions for abiraterone and enzalutamide among urology practices with and without in-office dispensing. METHODS: Using data from the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs, we identified in-office dispensing by single-specialty urology practices from 2011 to 2018. As the greatest growth in implementing dispensing occurred among large groups in 2015, outcomes were measured at the practice level in 2014 (before) and 2016 (after) for dispensing and non-dispensing practices. Outcomes included the volume of men with advanced prostate cancer managed by a practice and prescriptions for abiraterone and/or enzalutamide. Using national Medicare data, generalized linear mixed models were fit to compare the practice-level ratio of each outcome (2016 relative to 2014) adjusting for regional contextual factors. RESULTS: In-office dispensing increased from 1% to 30% of single-specialty urology practices from 2011 to 2018, with 28 practices implementing dispensing in 2015. In 2016 compared to 2014, adjusted changes in the volume of patients with advanced prostate cancer managed by a practice were similar between non-dispensing (0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.94) and dispensing (0.93, 95% CI 0.76-1.09) practices (P = .60). Prescriptions for abiraterone and/or enzalutamide increased in both non-dispensing (2.00, 95% CI 1.58-2.41) and dispensing (8.99, 95% CI 4.51-13.47) practices (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: In-office dispensing is increasingly common in urology practices. This emerging model is not associated with changes in patient volume but is associated with increased prescriptions for abiraterone and enzalutamide.

A retrospective study on the incidence, management and risk factors of skin rash in patients with advanced prostate cancer in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, prostate cancer (PC) is the second most diagnosed cancer and the fifth leading cause of cancer death in men. Hormonal therapies, commonly used for PC, are associated with a range of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The population from Japan seems to be at higher risk of developing TEAEs of skin rash compared to the overall global population. This study was conducted to get a better insight into the incidence, management, and risk factors for skin rash during active treatment for advanced PC in Japan. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of PC patients was identified and subsequently categorized, into non-metastatic and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients (nmCRPC and mCRPC), and metastatic castration-naïve prostate cancer patients (mCNPC). The analysis was based on a dataset from the Medical Data Vision (MDV) database. Descriptive statistics were determined, and a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was used to the associated risk factors for the onset of rash. RESULTS: Overall, 1,738 nmCRPC patients, 630 mCRPC patients, and 454 mCNPC patients were included in this analysis. The median age was 78 years old and similar across the three cohorts. The skin rash incidence was 19.97% for nmCRPC cohort, 28.89% for mCRPC cohort, and 28.85% for mCNPC cohort. The median duration of skin rash ranged from 29 to 42 days. Statistically significant risk factors for developing skin rash included a history of allergy or hypersensitivity (all cohorts), increased age (nmCRPC and mCRPC), a body mass index (BMI) of < 18.5 (nmCRPC and mCRPC), and a PSA level higher than the median (nmCRPC). Skin rash was commonly managed with systemic and topical corticosteroids which ranged from 41.76% to 67.03% for all cohorts. Antihistamines were infrequently used. CONCLUSION: This study provides a better understanding of the real-world incidence, onset, duration, management and risk factors of skin rash in patients on active PC treatment in Japan. It was observed that approximately 20-30% of PC patients experience skin rash. Development of skin rash was associated with previous allergy or hypersensitivity, BMI of < 18.5, increased age and higher PSA levels, and was usually treated with corticosteroids.