The cost-effectiveness of transurethral resection of the prostate vs thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate in the UNBLOCS randomised controlled trial for benign prostatic obstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of the current 'gold standard' operation of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) compared to the new laser technique of thulium laser transurethral vaporesection of the prostate (ThuVARP) in men with benign prostatic obstruction (BPO) within the UK National Health Service (NHS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The trial was conducted across seven UK centres (four university teaching hospitals and three district general hospitals). A total of 410 men aged ≥18 years presenting with either bothersome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) or urinary retention secondary to BPO, and suitable for surgery, were randomised (whilst under anaesthetic) 1:1 to receive the TURP or ThuVARP procedure. Resource use in relation to the operation, initial inpatient stay, and subsequent use of NHS services was collected for 12 months from randomisation (equivalent to primary effectiveness outcome) using hospital records and patient questionnaires. Resources were valued using UK reference costs. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated from the EuroQoL five Dimensions five Levels (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire completed at baseline, 3- and 12-months. Total adjusted mean costs, QALYs and incremental Net Monetary Benefit statistics were calculated: cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty. RESULTS: The total adjusted mean secondary care cost over the 12 months in the TURP arm (£4244) was £9 (95% CI -£376, £359) lower than the ThuVARP arm (£4253). The ThuVARP operation took on average 21 min longer than TURP. The adjusted mean difference of QALYs (0.01 favouring TURP, 95% CI -0.01, 0.04) was similar between the arms. There is a 76% probability that TURP is the cost-effective option compared with ThuVARP at the £20 000 per QALY willingness to pay threshold used by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). CONCLUSION: One of the anticipated benefits of the laser surgery, reduced length of hospital stay with an associated reduction in cost, did not materialise within the study. The longer duration of the ThuVARP procedure is important to consider, both from a patient perspective in terms of increased time under anaesthetic, and from a service delivery perspective. TURP remains a highly cost-effective treatment for men with BPO.

Radiofrequency-induced Thermo-chemotherapy Effect Versus a Second Course of Bacillus Calmette-Guérin or Institutional Standard in Patients with Recurrence of Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer Following Induction or Maintenance Bacillus Calmette-Guérin Therapy (HYMN): A Phase III, Open-label, Randomised Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no effective intravesical second-line therapy for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) when bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) fails. OBJECTIVE: To compare disease-free survival time (DFS) between radiofrequency-induced thermo-chemotherapy effect (RITE) and institutional standard second-line therapy (control) in NMIBC patients with recurrence following induction/maintenance BCG. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, phase III randomised controlled trial accrued across 14 centres between May 2010 and July 2013 (HYMN [ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01094964]). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to RITE (60min, 40mg mitomycin-C, 42±2°C) or control following stratification for carcinoma in situ (CIS) status (present/absent), therapy history (failure of previous induction/maintenance BCG), and treatment centre. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measures were DFS and complete response (CR) at 3 mo for the CIS at randomisation subgroup. Analysis was based on intention-to-treat. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 104 patients were randomised (48 RITE: 56 control). Median follow-up for the 31 patients without a DFS event was 36 mo. There was no significant difference in DFS between treatment arms (hazard ratio [HR] 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-2.10, p=0.23) or in 3-mo CR rate in CIS patients (n=71; RITE: 30% vs control: 47%, p=0.15). There was no significant difference in DFS between treatment arms in non-CIS patients (n=33; RITE: 53% vs control: 24% at 24 mo, HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-1.17, p=0.11). DFS was significantly lower in RITE than in control in CIS with/without papillary patients (n=71; HR 2.06, 95% CI 1.17-3.62, p=0.01; treatment-subgroup interaction p=0.007). Disease progression was observed in four patients in each treatment arm. Adverse events and health-related quality of life between treatment arms were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: DFS was similar between RITE and control. RITE may be a second-line therapy for non-CIS recurrence following BCG failure; however, confirmatory trials are needed. RITE patients with CIS with/without papillary had lower DFS than control. HYMN highlights the importance of the control arm when evaluating novel therapies. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study did not show a difference in bladder cancer outcomes between microwave-heated chemotherapy and standard of care treatment. Papillary bladder lesions may benefit from microwave-heated chemotherapy treatment; however, more research is needed. Both treatments are similarly well tolerated.