1. Cost-Effectiveness Assessment of Monitoring Abiraterone Levels in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Patients
- Author
-
Renske M.T. ten Ham, Alwin D. R. Huitema, Rick A. Vreman, Andre M. Bergman, Hilde Rosing, Merel van Nuland, Anke M. Hövels, Laurens G. de Graaf, and Jos H. Beijnen
- Subjects
Male ,Oncology ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Cost effectiveness ,Cost-Benefit Analysis ,Abiraterone Acetate ,Antineoplastic Agents ,Castration resistant ,Disease-Free Survival ,03 medical and health sciences ,Prostate cancer ,Cmin ,chemistry.chemical_compound ,0302 clinical medicine ,Internal medicine ,medicine ,Humans ,030212 general & internal medicine ,health care economics and organizations ,Aged ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,030503 health policy & services ,Health Policy ,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health ,Abiraterone acetate ,Prostate-Specific Antigen ,medicine.disease ,Markov Chains ,Prostatic Neoplasms, Castration-Resistant ,Abiraterone ,chemistry ,Therapeutic drug monitoring ,Concomitant ,Quality-Adjusted Life Years ,Drug Monitoring ,0305 other medical science ,business - Abstract
Objectives Abiraterone acetate is registered for the treatment of metastatic castration-sensitive and resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Treatment outcome is associated with plasma trough concentrations (Cmin) of abiraterone. Patients with a plasma Cmin below the target of 8.4 ng/mL may benefit from treatment optimization by dose increase or concomitant intake with food. This study aims to investigate the cost-effectiveness of monitoring abiraterone Cmin in patients with mCRPC. Methods A Markov model was built with health states progression-free survival, progressed disease, and death. The benefits of monitoring abiraterone Cmin followed by a dose increase or food intervention were modeled via a difference in the percentage of patients achieving adequate Cmin taking a healthcare payer perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainties and their impac to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results Monitoring abiraterone followed by a dose increase resulted in 0.149 incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with €22 145 incremental costs and an ICER of €177 821/QALY. The food intervention assumed equal effects and estimated incremental costs of €7599, resulting in an ICER of €61 019/QALY. The likelihoods of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) with a dose increase or food intervention being cost-effective were 8.04%and 81.9%, respectively. Conclusions Monitoring abiraterone followed by a dose increase is not cost-effective in patients with mCRPC from a healthcare payer perspective. Monitoring in combination with a food intervention is likely to be cost-effective. This cost-effectiveness assessment may assist decision making in future integration of abiraterone TDM followed by a food intervention into standard abiraterone acetate treatment practices of mCRPC patients.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF