Outcomes for Muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer with Radical Cystectomy or Trimodal Therapy in US Veterans.

BACKGROUND: Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) remains undertreated despite multiple potentially curative options. Both radical cystectomy (RC) with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy and trimodal therapy (TMT), including transurethral resection of bladder tumor followed by chemoradiotherapy, are standard treatments. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate real-world clinical outcomes of RC with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (RC-NAC), RC without NAC, TMT with National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-preferred radiosensitizing chemotherapy including cisplatin or mitomycin-C and 5-fluorouracil (pTMT), and TMT with nonpreferred chemotherapy (npTMT). DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: US veterans with nonmetastatic MIBC (T2-4aN0-3M0) were studied. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Overall mortality (OM) was evaluated with multivariable Cox proportional hazard model. Bladder cancer-specific mortality (BCSM) was evaluated with multivariable Fine-Gray regression. Salvage cystectomy rates were obtained by chart review. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall 2306 patients were included: 1472 (64%) with RC without NAC, 506 (22%) with RC-NAC, 163 (7%) with pTMT, and 165 (7%) with npTMT. On multivariable analysis, pTMT was associated with similar OM (hazard ratio [HR] 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-1.50; p = 0.15) and BCSM (HR 1.34; 95% CI 0.99-1.83; p = 0.06) to RC-NAC; npTMT was associated with worse OM (HR 1.30; 95% CI 1.04-1.61; p = 0.02) and BCSM (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.09-1.94; p = 0.01). RC without NAC was associated with similar OM (HR 1.08; 95% CI 0.95-1.24; p = 0.24) and BCSM (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.86-1.21; p = 0.79). When stratified by age, among patients ≥65 yr of age, treatment with pTMT was associated with similar OM (HR 1.14; 95% CI 0.87-1.50; p = 0.35) and BCSM (HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.76-1.62; p = 0.60). Among patients <65 yr of age, pTMT was associated with worse OM (HR 1.82; 95% CI 1.14-2.91; p = 0.01) and BCSM (HR 2.51; 95% CI 1.52-4.13; p < 0.01). The 5-yr cumulative incidence of salvage cystectomy in the TMT group was 3.6%. CONCLUSIONS: In MIBC, patients receiving pTMT have comparable survival in RC-NAC patients ≥65 yr and inferior survival in RC-NAC patients <65 yr. Salvage cystectomy rates were low. PATIENT SUMMARY: Management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer is a multidisciplinary effort requiring thoughtful discussions with patients about treatment options, including trimodal therapy, which is an effective treatment option.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy in Patients With Oligometastatic Cancer.

PURPOSE: The Stereotactic Ablative Radiation therapy for Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors phase 2 randomized clinical trial found that stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) improved outcomes among cancer patients with oligometastatic disease. Yet, the cost of SABR along with the large number of patients with oligometastatic disease raises the important question of value. This study sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of SABR compared with standard therapy alone among cancer patients with oligometastatic disease. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We constructed a Markov model to simulate treatment with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy or standard therapy among patients with oligometastatic cancers. The model derived transition probabilities from Stereotactic Ablative Radiation therapy for Comprehensive Treatment of Oligometastatic Tumors clinical trial data to estimate risks of toxicity, disease progression and survival. Health care costs and health utilities were estimated from the literature. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses evaluate model uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness was estimated from both the health care sector and societal perspectives with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) defined as dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). An ICER less than $100,000/QALY was considered cost-effective. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to examine model uncertainty. RESULTS: The addition of SABR increased total costs by $54,260 (health care sector perspective) or $72,799 (societal perspective) and improved effectiveness by 1.88 QALYs compared with standard therapy, leading to an ICER of $28,906/QALY (health care sector perspective) or $38,783/QALY (societal perspective). The model was modestly sensitive to assumptions about tumor progression, although the model was not sensitive to assumptions about survival or cost of treatment. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that SABR was the cost-effective treatment option 99.8% (health care sector perspective) or 98.7% (societal perspective) of the time. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of SABR increased costs and improved quality adjusted survival, overall leading to a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients with oligometastatic cancer.

Evaluation of the Use of Cancer Registry Data for Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Importance: Researchers often analyze cancer registry data to assess for differences in survival among cancer treatments. However, the retrospective, nonrandomized design of these analyses raises questions about study validity. Objective: To examine the extent to which comparative effectiveness analyses using observational cancer registry data produce results concordant with those of randomized clinical trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this comparative effectiveness study, a total of 141 randomized clinical trials referenced in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines for 8 common solid tumor types were identified. Data on participants within the National Cancer Database (NCDB) diagnosed between 2004 and 2014, matching the eligibility criteria of the randomized clinical trial, were obtained. The present study was conducted from August 1, 2017, to September 10, 2019. The trials included 85 118 patients, and the corresponding NCDB analyses included 1 344 536 patients. Three Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to determine hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival, including univariable, multivariable, and propensity score-adjusted models. Multivariable and propensity score analyses controlled for potential confounders, including demographic, comorbidity, clinical, treatment, and tumor-related variables. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was concordance between the results of randomized clinical trials and observational cancer registry data. Hazard ratios with an NCDB analysis were considered concordant if the NDCB HR fell within the 95% CI of the randomized clinical trial HR. An NCDB analysis was considered concordant if both the NCDB and clinical trial P values for survival were nonsignificant (P ≥ .05) or if they were both significant (P < .05) with survival favoring the same treatment arm in the NCDB and in the randomized clinical trial. Results: Analyses using the NCDB-produced HRs for survival were concordant with those of 141 randomized clinical trials in 79 univariable analyses (56%), 98 multivariable analyses (70%), and 90 propensity score models (64%). The NCDB analyses produced P values concordant with randomized clinical trials in 58 univariable analyses (41%), 65 multivariable analyses (46%), and 63 propensity score models (45%). No clinical trial characteristics were associated with concordance between NCDB analyses and randomized clinical trials, including disease site, type of clinical intervention, or severity of cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that comparative effectiveness research using cancer registry data often produces survival outcomes discordant with those of randomized clinical trial data. These findings may help provide context for clinicians and policy makers interpreting observational comparative effectiveness research in oncology.