4.7 Article

The value of new drugs for advanced prostate cancer

Journal

CANCER
Volume 127, Issue 18, Pages 3457-3465

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.33662

Keywords

castration-resistant antineoplastic agents; comparative effectiveness research; cost-benefit analysis; costs and cost analysis; prostatic neoplasms

Categories

Funding

  1. Pfizer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study evaluated the real-world effectiveness and value of drugs recently approved for advanced prostate cancer. Between 2007-2009 and 2014-2016, life expectancy increased by 12.6 months and lifetime medical costs increased by $87,000.
BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration has recently approved a number of new cancer drugs. The clinical trials that serve as the basis for new cancer drug approvals may not reflect how the drugs will perform in routine practice and do not measure the impact of the drugs on spending. The authors sought to evaluate the real-world effectiveness and value of drugs recently approved for advanced prostate cancer. METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data, the authors identified fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older who began treatment with a drug approved for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer in 2007-2009, when only 1 drug was approved for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, and in 2014-2016, when 5 additional drugs were approved. They calculated life expectancy and lifetime medical costs (ie, Medicare reimbursements) for each group. RESULTS: Between 2007-2009 and 2014-2016, life expectancy increased by 12.6 months. Lifetime medical costs increased by $87,000. The incremental cost per life-year gained was $83,000. CONCLUSION: The release of 5 new drugs coincided with increases in survival rates and spending. This study's estimates indicate that the new drugs collectively were cost-effective. (c) 2021 American Cancer Society.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available