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.

External control arms: COVID-19 reveals the merits of using real world evidence in real-time for clinical and public health investigations.

Randomized controlled trials are considered the 'gold standard' to reduce bias by randomizing patients to an experimental intervention, versus placebo or standard of care cohort. There are inherent challenges to enrolling a standard of care or cohorts: costs, site engagement logistics, socioeconomic variability, patient willingness, ethics of placebo interventions, cannibalizing the treatment arm population, and extending study duration. The COVID-19 pandemic has magnified aspects of constraints in trial recruitment and logistics, spurring innovative approaches to reducing trial sizes, accelerating trial accrual while preserving statistical rigor. Using data from medical records and databases allows for construction of external control arms that reduce the costs of an external control arm (ECA) randomized to standard of care. Simultaneously examining covariates of the clinical outcomes in ECAs that are being measured in the interventional arm can be particularly useful in phase 2 trials to better understand social and genetic determinants of clinical outcomes that might inform pivotal trial design. The FDA and EMA have promulgated a number of publicly available guidance documents and qualification reports that inform the use of this regulatory science tool to streamline clinical development, of phase 4 surveillance, and policy aspects of clinical outcomes research. Availability and quality of real-world data (RWD) are a prevalent impediment to the use of ECAs given such data is not collected with the rigor and deliberateness that characterizes prospective interventional control arm data. Conversely, in the case of contemporary control arms, a clinical trial outcome can be compared to a contemporary standard of care in cases where the standard of care is evolving at a fast pace, such as the use of checkpoint inhibitors in cancer care. Innovative statistical methods are an essential aspect of an ECA strategy and regulatory paths for these innovative approaches have been navigated, qualified, and in some cases published.

Survival and Economic Impact of Rapid Prostate-Specific Antigen Doubling Time in Patients With Nonmetastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC), prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT) is associated with risk of metastasis and survival. This study evaluated the association of PSADT with clinical and economic outcomes in a real-world setting among patients with nmCRPC not receiving novel hormonal therapy (NHT), using 2-month PSADT thresholds. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified Veterans Health Administration patients with nonmetastatic prostate cancer and ≥2 PSA increases after medical/surgical castration (2012-2016). The third measurement was the index (CRPC) date. Patients with ≥3 postindex PSA measurements, including index, were followed until death or ≥12 months until disenrollment, study end, or death, and grouped into 2-month cohorts based on postindex PSADT. Cox regression models assessed association between PSADT, time to metastasis, and death. Healthcare resource utilization and costs were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 2800 evaluable patients, median follow-up was 30 months and median PSADT was 17 months. Relative to the reference cohort (PSADT >12 months), all cohorts had significantly higher metastasis risk. PSADT ≤10-month cohorts had significantly greater mortality risk than the reference; hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) ranged from 12.3 (9.2, 16.4) in the PSADT ≤2-month cohort to 1.3 (0.9, 2.0) in the >10 to ≤12-month cohort. Total costs were significantly higher for cohorts up to and including the PSADT >8 to ≤10-month cohort, than for the reference cohort. Mean per patient per month all-cause medical plus pharmacy costs were $6623, $4768, and $4049 in the PSADT ≤2-month, >2 to ≤4-month cohort, and >4 to ≤6-month cohorts, respectively, versus $1911 in the PSADT >12-month cohort (P <0.05). CONCLUSION: Most patients with nmCRPC have PSADT >12 months and a long natural history. For those with shorter PSADT, the risk of metastasis, death, and costs increased. These data can help select patients for NHT and conversely those who can safely delay NHT for nmCRPC.

Does race make a difference in how long men with advanced prostate cancer live when treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide?

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a summary of a research article originally published in Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases. There were few Black men in the clinical trials that led to the approval of the medications abiraterone and enzalutamide. Abiraterone and enzalutamide are the two most commonly used drugs to treat men with advanced prostate cancer that has progressed on traditional hormonal therapy. This type of prostate cancer is called metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Overall, Black men have a higher likelihood of dying from prostate cancer than White men. Researchers wanted to find out if Black men and White men with mCRPC benefitted differently when treated with either abiraterone or enzalutamide. To do this, researchers looked at medical information from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The VHA is a large healthcare system for veterans in the US where everyone has equal access to treatment. 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 healthcare practitioners. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: After accounting for differences in the men's age and health conditions, researchers found that, on average, Black men with mCRPC actually lived 8 months longer than White men with mCRPC. WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY MEAN?: This real-world, US study of men with mCRPC treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide found that Black men lived longer than White men. All men in this study had equal access to healthcare and were treated with either abiraterone or enzalutamide. More research is needed to understand the reasons for this. Understanding these reasons could guide treatment to help men with mCRPC live longer.

Temporal Changes in Cholangiocarcinoma Incidence and Mortality in the United States from 2001 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies report increasing cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) incidence up to 2015. This contemporary retrospective analysis of CCA incidence and mortality in the US from 2001-2017 assessed whether CCA incidence continued to increase beyond 2015. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients (≥18 years) with CCA were identified in the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 18 cancer registry (International Classification of Disease for Oncology [ICD-O]-3 codes: intrahepatic [iCCA], C221; extrahepatic [eCCA], C240, C241, C249). Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) cases were identified (ICD-O-3: C809; 8140/2, 8140/3, 8141/3, 8143/3, 8147/3) because of potential misclassification as iCCA. RESULTS: Forty-thousand-and-thirty CCA cases (iCCA, n=13,174; eCCA, n=26,821; iCCA and eCCA, n=35) and 32,980 CUP cases were analyzed. From 2001-2017, CCA, iCCA, and eCCA incidence (per 100 000 person-years) increased 43.8% (3.08 to 4.43), 148.8% (0.80 to 1.99), and 7.5% (2.28 to 2.45), respectively. In contrast, CUP incidence decreased 54.4% (4.65 to 2.12). CCA incidence increased with age, with greatest increase among younger patients (18-44 years, 81.0%). Median overall survival from diagnosis was 8, 6, 9, and 2 months for CCA, iCCA, eCCA, and CUP. From 2001-2016, annual mortality rate declined for iCCA (57.1% to 41.2%) and generally remained stable for eCCA (40.9% to 37.0%) and for CUP (64.3% to 68.6%). CONCLUSIONS: CCA incidence continued to increase from 2001-2017, with greater increase in iCCA versus eCCA, whereas CUP incidence decreased. The divergent CUP versus iCCA incidence trends, with overall greater absolute change in iCCA incidence, provide evidence for a true increase in iCCA incidence that may not be wholly attributable to CUP reclassification.

COVID-19 associated disruptions in routine health care of people with mild cognitive impairment or dementia.

Introduction: We report the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on health-care use disruption among people with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease and related dementia (MCI/ADRD). Methods: We compared the pandemic-period health-care use between MCI/ADRD and matched non-MCI/ADRD patients. Using 4-year pre-pandemic data, we modeled three health-care use types (inpatient, outpatient, emergency encounters) to predict pandemic-period use, disaggregated for lockdown and post-lockdown periods. Observed health-care use was compared to the predicted. Proportional differences (confidence intervals) are reported. Results: Both MCI/ADRD and non-MCI/ADRD patients (n = 5479 each) experienced pandemic-related health-care use disruptions, which were significantly larger for the MCI/ADRD group for outpatient, -13.2% (-16.2%, -10.2%), and inpatient encounters, -12.8% (-18.4%, -7.3%). Large health-care disruptions during lockdown were similar for both groups. However, post-lockdown outpatient, -14.4% (-17.3%, -11.5%), and inpatient, -15.2% (-21.0%, -9.5%), disruptions were significantly greater for MCI/ADRD patients. Conclusion: MCI/ADRD patients experienced greater and sustained pandemic-related health-care use disruptions, highlighting the need for robust strategies to sustain their essential health care during pandemic-like catastrophes.

Clinical and economic burden of HPV-related cancers in the US veteran population.

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) is one of the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States and can lead to cervical, vulvovaginal, anal, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers. Compared with the general population, US military members are at a higher risk of HPV-related conditions, yet vaccination rates are relatively low in this population. As many service members may not be diagnosed with HPV-related cancers until after they leave active service, the objective of this study was to determine the incidence, prevalence, and economic burden of HPV-related cancers among US veterans. METHODS: The study used the 2014-2018 Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database to identify newly diagnosed adult patients (cases) with HPV-related cancers, including cervical, vulvovaginal, anal, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers. Cases were matched by age, race, and sex to patients without HPV related cancer (controls). Outcome measures included annual incidence, prevalence, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs. These outcomes were calculated from the index date (first cancer diagnosis) through the earliest of 24 months, death, or end of study period. Adjusted results were examined using generalized linear models. RESULTS: The annual prevalence and incidence rates of HPV-related cancers ranged from 43 (anal) to 790 (oropharyngeal) cases per million (CPM), and four (anal) to 131 (cervical) CPM, respectively. Compared with controls, cases had significantly higher annual HCRU. Mean numbers of annual inpatient hospitalizations were several times higher compared to controls (cervical: 6.7-times (×); vulvovaginal: 2.7×; penile: 6.6×; oropharyngeal: 10.2×; and anal: 14.9×; all p < 0.01). Similarly, cases had significantly higher all-cause healthcare costs vs. matched controls across all cancer types: cervical ($24,252 vs. $10,402), vulvovaginal ($34,801 vs. $10,913), penile ($42,772 vs. $9,139), oropharyngeal ($82,763 vs. $10,017), and anal ($98,146 vs. $8,339); (all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: HPV-related cancers may cause significant clinical and economic burden within the VHA system. Given the consequences of HPV-related cancers among veterans who did not have access to the vaccine, HPV vaccination of active military and eligible veterans should be considered a healthcare priority.

Academic Promotion and Oncology Drug Development: Role, Responsibilities, and Integrity

Nora Janjan, MD, MPSA, MBA, gives her perspective on oncology drug development through academic promotion.

Survival by race in men with chemotherapy-naive enzalutamide- or abiraterone-treated metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Black men are more likely to be diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer (PC) and die from PC than white men. However, black men with metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC) had longer overall survival (OS) than white men when treated with certain agents in clinical trials. We analyzed claims data from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) database to evaluate OS in black and white men treated with enzalutamide or abiraterone (novel hormonal therapy [NHT]) for chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC. METHODS: Patients with mCRPC aged ≥18 years were identified in the VHA database by diagnosis codes, evidence of surgical/medical castration, and a prescription claim for enzalutamide or abiraterone after castration from April 2014-March 2017. Cox models assessed associations between race and OS. Unadjusted and multivariable analyses were performed on the entire population and subsets based on the type of therapy received (if any) after NHT. RESULTS: In total, 2910 patients were identified (787 black, mean 71.7 years; 2123 white, mean 74.0 years). Median follow-up was 19.0 and 18.7 months in blacks and whites, respectively. Black men had better survival versus white men: hazard ratios (95% CIs) were 0.89 (0.790-0.996; P = 0.044) and 0.67 (0.592-0.758; P < 0.0001) in the unadjusted and multivariable models, respectively. Statistically significantly longer OS was seen in black versus white men regardless of subsequent treatment, including no subsequent treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In the VHA, black men with chemotherapy-naïve mCRPC initiating NHT may have better outcomes than similarly treated white men.

Time to Next Treatment, Health Care Resource Utilization, and Costs Associated with Ibrutinib Use Among U.S. Veterans with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma: A Real-World Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) is the most common adult leukemia, accounting for ≈ 37% of all leukemias in the United States. Limited real-word evidence is available on the outcomes of ibrutinib use among previously untreated patients in the U.S. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) population diagnosed with CLL/SLL. OBJECTIVES: To (a) evaluate time to next treatment (TTNT) among U.S. veterans with CLL/SLL who initiated ibrutinib versus chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in first line (1L) and 1L ibrutinib versus ibrutinib in later lines (2L+) and (b) compare health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs between the 1L ibrutinib and CIT cohorts. METHODS: Adults with CLL/SLL and claims for 1L single-agent ibrutinib or CIT (index date = first prescription claim date) were included from Veterans Health Administration Data (April 1, 2013-March 31, 2018). A subset of the CIT 1L cohort with evidence of ibrutinib in 2L/3L was defined as the ibrutinib 2L+ cohort. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate TTNT, and generalized linear models were used to determine all-cause per patient per month (PPPM) HRU and costs during 1L among propensity score-matched (PSM) cohorts. RESULTS: After PSM, 614 patients were included in each of the 1L ibrutinib and 1L CIT cohorts, and 149 were included in each of the 1L ibrutinib and 2L+ ibrutinib cohorts. The 1L ibrutinib cohort had significantly longer TTNT compared with each of the 1L CIT and 2L+ ibrutinib cohorts (P <0.0001 and P =0.0001, respectively) and was less likely to have a next line of treatment than the CIT 1L cohort (HR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.42-0.65; P < 0.0001) and the 2L+ ibrutinib cohort (HR = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.22-0.69; P = 0.0012). The 1L ibrutinib cohort had significantly fewer inpatient visits (rate ratio [RR] = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.28-0.52; P ≤ 0.05) and outpatient visits PPPM (RR =0.72; 95% CI = 0.68-0.77; P ≤ 0.5) compared with the CIT 1L cohort. Additionally, the 1L ibrutinib cohort had $7,308 significantly lower monthly medical costs (95% CI = -$9,892 to -$4,895; P ≤ 0.05) versus the 1L CIT cohort, resulting in comparable monthly total health care cost (medical and pharmacy) between real-world 1L patients treated by ibrutinib and CIT (-$2,160; 95% CI = -$4,840-$347; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that among U.S. veterans with CLL/SLL, 1L ibrutinib use was associated with significantly longer TTNT versus that of 1L CIT. Similarly, early treatment with ibrutinib was associated with longer TTNT as compared to ibrutinib use in later lines of therapy. Moreover, 1L ibrutinib was associated with lower HRU and medical costs compared with 1L CIT, completely offsetting the higher pharmacy costs related to 1L ibrutinib treatment. DISCLOSURES: This research was sponsored by Janssen Scientific Affairs. The analyses were performed by STATinMED Research. Huang is an employee of Janssen Scientific Affairs and may own company stock. Sundaram was an employee of Janssen Scientific Affairs at the time this study was conducted. Borra and Janjan are employees of STATinMED Research, a paid consultant to the study sponsor. Wang, Li, and Shrestha were employees of STATinMED Research at the time this study was conducted.

Health Services Utilization and Payments in Patients With Cancer Pain: A Comparison of Intrathecal Drug Delivery vs. Conventional Medical Management.

INTRODUCTION: To compare health services utilization and payments for cancer patients who received an implantable intrathecal drug delivery (IDD) system, consisting of a pump and catheter, vs. conventional medical management (CMM) for the treatment of cancer-related pain. METHODS: This retrospective claims-data analysis compared health services utilization and payments in a population of patients receiving either IDD or CMM for treatment of cancer pain. Patients were propensity score-matched 1:1 based on characteristics including, but not limited to, age, gender, cancer type, comorbid conditions, and health care utilization and payments. RESULTS: From a sample of 142 IDD patients and 3188 CMM patients who met all inclusion/exclusion criteria, 73 matched pairs were obtained. In the year following implant, IDD patients had a consistent trend of lower medical utilization, and total payments that were $3195 lower compared to CMM. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high initial cost of IDD, this analysis suggests that patients with IDD incur lower medical utilization and payments over the first year post-implant. Further analysis comprised of a larger, longitudinal sample would contribute to health economics and outcomes research, and assist with future practice guideline development.

Improving cancer pain control with NCCN guideline-based analgesic administration: a patient-centered outcome.

Improving the control of cancer-related pain (CRP) is a clinical and ethical imperative. Clinical research has documented improved treatment tolerance and survival rates among patients with cancer who have effective pain control. Barriers to CRP control include inadequate patient and physician education. Meta-analyses of patient education studies correlate improvements in CRP control with improved communications with health care providers and the implementation of strategies that assist with adherence to medication schedules. These strategies build patient confidence, allowing better self-management of pain and reduced psychological consequences. For physicians, ample educational resources exist in CRP management. However, in both the inpatient and outpatient settings, compliance with NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology for Adult Cancer Pain continues to be less than 70%, and more than one-third of patients continue to receive inadequate doses of analgesics. Patient-centered outcomes have become an integral end point in health policy, and the nation's medical training, research, and delivery systems are transforming to a value-based accreditation and reimbursement system. Pain control is a significant patient-centered outcome in cancer care, because pain adversely impacts function and affects all domains of quality of life. Agreement is clear on the value of health care interventions that relieve suffering from cancer pain and restore personal dignity.

Adult cancer pain.

Pain is a common symptom associated with cancer and its treatment. Pain management is an important aspect of oncologic care, and unrelieved pain significantly comprises overall quality of life. These NCCN Guidelines list the principles of management and acknowledge the range of complex decisions faced in the management oncologic pain. In addition to pain assessment techniques, these guidelines provide principles of use, dosing, management of adverse effects, and safe handling procedures of pharmacologic therapies and discuss a multidisciplinary approach for the management of cancer pain.

Recommendations for including multiple symptoms as endpoints in cancer clinical trials: a report from the ASCPRO (Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes) Multisymptom Task Force.

The multiple symptoms arising from cancer and its treatment impose significant distress for patients. However, in clinical research, there is no agreed-upon way of assessing and presenting the effects of treatment on multiple symptoms, as either individual scores or a composite score. The ASCPRO (Assessing the Symptoms of Cancer Using Patient-Reported Outcomes) Multisymptom Task Force was established to make recommendations about measuring multiple symptoms as outcomes in cancer clinical trials. The Multisymptom Task Force addressed how to choose the symptoms to be assessed and how multiple individual symptom scores or composite scores of several symptoms might be used as clinical trial outcomes. Consensus was reached on a definition of a multisymptom outcome, the problem of source attribution, and the need for a hypothesis-driven conceptual framework to measure multisymptom outcomes. Validated single-item and multi-item measures currently available or that can be easily generated for oncology use were deemed sufficient for measuring multiple symptoms. The relative value of a composite score versus a set of individual symptom scores was discussed, along with issues in developing and deploying such a composite measure. The results indicated that more research on combining scores of different symptoms is needed. Symptom data should be a required component of cancer clinical trials. Patient-reported symptoms provide a unique patient perspective on treatment benefit and risk that goes beyond clinician-reported adverse events. A representation of changes in multiple symptoms would clarify the impact of treatment and enhance the interpretation of cancer clinical trials for clinicians, patients, and those who make health care policy.

American Society of Clinical Oncology executive summary of the clinical practice guideline update on the role of bone-modifying agents in metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To update the recommendations on the role of bone-modifying agents in the prevention and treatment of skeletal-related events (SREs) for patients with metastatic breast cancer with bone metastases. METHODS: A literature search using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Collaboration Library identified relevant studies published between January 2003 and November 2010. The primary outcomes of interest were SREs and time to SRE. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and pain. An Update Committee reviewed the literature and re-evaluated previous recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendations were modified to include a new agent. A recommendation regarding osteonecrosis of the jaw was added. RECOMMENDATIONS: Bone-modifying agent therapy is only recommended for patients with breast cancer with evidence of bone metastases; denosumab 120 mg subcutaneously every 4 weeks, intravenous pamidronate 90 mg over no less than 2 hours, or zoledronic acid 4 mg over no less than 15 minutes every 3 to 4 weeks is recommended. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate greater efficacy of one bone-modifying agent over another. In patients with a calculated serum creatinine clearance of more than 60 mg/min, no change in dosage, infusion time, or interval of bisphosphonate administration is required. Serum creatinine should be monitored before each dose. All patients should receive a dental examination and appropriate preventive dentistry before bone-modifying agent therapy and maintain optimal oral health. Current standards of care for cancer bone pain management should be applied at the onset of pain, in concert with the initiation of bone-modifying agent therapy. The use of biochemical markers to monitor bone-modifying agent use is not recommended.