title: Therapeutic options in docetaxel-refractory metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Docetaxel is an established first-line therapy to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Recently, abiraterone and cabazitaxel were approved for use after docetaxel failure, with improved survival. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) preliminary recommendations were negative for both abiraterone (now positive in final recommendation) and cabazitaxel (negative in final recommendation).
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abiraterone, cabazitaxel, mitoxantrone and prednisone for mCRPC treatment in US.
  
  
  METHODS
  A decision-tree model was constructed to compare the two mCRPC treatments versus two placebos over 18 months from a societal perspective. Chance nodes include baseline pain as a severity indicator, grade III/IV side-effects, and survival at 18 months. Probabilities, survival and health utilities were from published studies. Model cost inputs included drug treatment, side-effect management and prevention, radiation for pain, and death associated costs in 2010 US dollars.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Abiraterone is a cost-effective choice at $94K/QALY (quality adjusted life years) compared to placebo in our base-case analysis. Cabazitaxel and abiraterone are the most effective, yet also most expensive agents. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) at base-case are $101K/QALY (extended dominated) for mitoxantrone vs. placebo, $91K/QALY for abiraterone vs. mitoxantrone, $956K/QALY for cabazitaxel vs. abiraterone. Abiraterone becomes less cost-effective as its AWP increases, or if the cost of mitoxantrone side-effect management decreases. Increases in the percentage of patients with baseline pain leads to an increased ICER for both mitoxantrone and abiraterone, but mitoxantrone does relatively better. Cabazitaxel remains not cost-effective.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Our base case model suggests that abiraterone is a cost-effective option in docetaxel-refractory mCRPC patients. Newer treatments will also need a CEA assessment compared to abiraterone.
authors.affiliation: University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
authors.forename: Lixian
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Zhong
authors.forename: Vickie
authors.initials: V
authors.lastname: Pon
authors.forename: Sandy
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Srinivas
authors.forename: Nicole
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Nguyen
authors.forename: Meghan
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Frear
authors.forename: Sherry
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Kwon
authors.forename: Cynthia
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Gong
authors.forename: Robert
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Malmstrom
authors.forename: Leslie
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Wilson
mesh_terms: D000970:Antineoplastic Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D000077143:Docetaxel; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009362:Neoplasm Metastasis; D009919:Orchiectomy; D011336:Probability; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D019057:Quality-Adjusted Life Years; D043823:Taxoids / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D000970:Antineoplastic Agents; D043823:Taxoids; D000077143:Docetaxel