Lorie Ellis

Cost per median overall survival month associated with abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide for treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer

Abstract Objective: To calculate costs per median overall survival (OS) month in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA + P) or enzalutamide. Methods: Median treatment duration and median OS data from published Phase 3 clinical trials and prescribing information were used to calculate costs per median OS month based on wholesale acquisition costs (WACs) for patients with mCRPC treated with AA + P or enzalutamide. Sensitivity analyses were performed to understand how variations in treatment duration and treatment-related monitoring recommendations influenced cost per median OS month. Cost-effectiveness estimates of other Phase 3 trial outcomes were also explored: cost per month of chemotherapy avoided and per median radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) month. Results: The results demonstrated that AA + P has a lower cost per median OS month than enzalutamide (

Prescribing Patterns of Oral Antineoplastic Therapies Observed in the Treatment of Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer Between 2012 and 2014: Results of an Oncology EMR Analysis

3231 vs 4512; 28% reduction), based on the following assumptions: median treatment duration of 14 months for AA + P and 18 months for enzalutamide, median OS of 34.7 months for AA + P and 35.3 months for enzalutamide, and WAC per 30-day supply of

Real-world treatment patterns and health care resource utilization (HRU) among patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) by regimen.

8007.17 for AA + P vs

Treatment sequencing patterns of novel agents in patients with prostate cancer.

8847.98 for enzalutamide. Sensitivity analyses showed that accounting for recommended treatment-related monitoring costs or assuming identical treatment durations for AA + P and enzalutamide (18 months) resulted in costs per median OS month 8–27% lower for AA + P than for enzalutamide. Costs per month of chemotherapy avoided were

Abstract 4139: Healthcare resource utilization (HRU) in treated mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients

4448 for AA + P and

A real-world, multi-site, observational study of infusion time and treatment satisfaction with rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with intravenous golimumab or infliximab

5688 for enzalutamide, while costs per month to achieve median rPFS were

SAT0209 A comparative real-world utilization patterns of innovator and biosimilar infliximab in a treatment naÏve and switch population from germany: a prescription claims analysis

6794 for AA + P and

Assessment of Evidence-Based Standards in the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer in a Community Practice

7963 for enzalutamide. Conclusions: This cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrated that costs per median OS month, along with costs of other Phase 3 trial outcomes, were lower for AA + P than for enzalutamide. The findings were robust to sensitivity analyses. These results have important implications for population health decision-makers evaluating the relative value of therapies for mCRPC patients.

FRI0211 A descriptive analysis of real-world treatment patterns of innovator infliximab (REMICADE) and biosimilar infliximab in a treatment naÏve turkish rheumatologic disease population

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to examine, using a US electronic medical records (EMR) database, the clinical characteristics and real-world treatment sequences in men with advanced prostate cancer who initiated treatment with abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide. METHODS This retrospective, observational study evaluated adult male patients with a diagnosis of prostate cancer (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification code 185) in the EMR database between July 1, 2011, and March 31, 2014, who had initiated first-line treatment with abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide between September 1, 2012, and March 31, 2014. The first record for a patient initiating abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide was the index date. Patients had 6 months of pre-index medical record history and a variable length follow-up period, extending from the index date to the end of medical record data availability or date of the end of the study (March 31, 2014). The sequence of first- and second-line therapies for advanced prostate cancer therapy was reported. FINDINGS A total of 809 patients met study inclusion and exclusion criteria. This study found that the majority of patients who initiated treatment with either abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide between September 1, 2012, and March 31, 2014, received a single line of therapy (72%); abiraterone acetate was the most common first-line treatment (74% of first-line patients). A subset of patients treated first-line with either abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide were transitioned to an oral second-line agent (17% of first-line abiraterone acetate-treated patients transitioned to second-line enzalutamide, and 16% of first-line enzalutamide-treated patients transitioned to second-line abiraterone acetate). Chemotherapy with docetaxel was also a commonly observed second-line treatment selection, occurring in 8% of first-line abiraterone acetate-treated patients and in 7% of first-line enzalutamide-treated patients. IMPLICATIONS This EMR study is among the first to present evidence of US physician practice prescribing patterns regarding initiation of oral antineoplastic agents and use of subsequent therapies in patients with advanced prostate cancer.

Prevalence of glucocorticoid use in prostate cancer patients.

15 Background: Few studies examine HRU of CLL, the most common hematologic malignancy in adults. This study describes HRU by the most common regimens among CLL patients (pts). METHODS A retrospective study using a large, national U.S. claims database from 1/2007-10/2013 was conducted. Adult CLL pts (≥2 claims for CLL) with ≥1 claim for systemic anticancer therapy (SACT) were identified; first SACT claim date was the index date. Pts had to have a CLL diagnosis ≤3 months (m) prior to the index date and be continuously enrolled (CE) in the health plan for 24m pre- and ≥6m post-index date. Pregnant pts and those with SACT in the pre-index period were excluded. A line of therapy (LOT) started with the first SACT; regimens included all agents received in the first 60 days. LOTs ended at the earliest of, start of a new drug, ≥60-day gap in receipt of initial regimen drugs, death or CE end. All-cause HRU was examined by regimen. RESULTS There were 946 CLL pts identified. Mean age was 68 years, 63% were male, and by insurance type, 41% were Medicare Advantage vs. 59% commercially insured. During the first LOT, 96% and 78% of pts had ≥1 office or hospital outpatient visit with mean per patient per month (PPPM) visits of 4.3 (standard deviation, SD = 2.8) and 2.2 (SD = 2.8), respectively. 31% and 25% had ≥1 ER visit or inpatient stay with mean PPPM visits of 0.2 (SD = 0.4) and 0.1 (SD = 0.3), respectively. Mean PPPM count of inpatient stay days was 1.4 (SD = 8.0). In first LOT, the top 3 regimens accounted for 56% of pts: FCR: fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab (19%); R: rituximab (19%); BR: bendamustine, rituximab (18%). During the study period, 318 pts (34%) started a second LOT. The top 3 LOT2 regimens accounted for 52% of pts: R (30%); BR (14%); chlorambucil (8%). CONCLUSIONS HRU of CLL pts varied by initial regimen received. Future studies should examine influences of regimen choice and whether regimen choice is associated with differences in outcomes. [Table: see text].