Real-world clinical and economic outcomes in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

IF 3 3区医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy Pub Date : 2026-10-06 DOI:10.1080/14737140.2026.2738626

Rana R McKay, Jennifer Nguyen, Barinder Kang, Clare Byrne, Jackson Tang, Kyle Runeckles, Amrita Sawhney, Jeetvan Patel

{"title":"Real-world clinical and economic outcomes in chemotherapy-naïve patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.","authors":"Rana R McKay, Jennifer Nguyen, Barinder Kang, Clare Byrne, Jackson Tang, Kyle Runeckles, Amrita Sawhney, Jeetvan Patel","doi":"10.1080/14737140.2026.2738626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Real-world treatment and outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are evolving.Research design and methods: This retrospective study used data from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Database (01/01/2009-12/31/2019). Patients with mCRPC who previously received one androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) followed by either a second ARPI (ARPI cohort) or a taxane (taxane cohort) were included. Treatment patterns, serious adverse events (SAEs [based on hospitalization or emergency room (ER) claim]), healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs were evaluated descriptively, with Kaplan-Meier analysis for overall survival (OS).Results: Of 923 patients, 714 were in the ARPI cohort and 209 in the taxane cohort. Overall, 33.3% vs 53.6% of patients in the ARPI vs taxane cohorts received a subsequent treatment (p < 0.001), most commonly taxanes in both cohorts. Median OS was ≈1 year in both cohorts. SAEs were more frequent in the taxane cohort (66.0% vs 42.2%; p < 0.001). The taxane cohort had more ER, outpatient, and pharmacy visits (p < 0.0001), while the ARPI cohort had more hospitalizations (p < 0.0001).Conclusions: Results demonstrate that patients with mCRPC receiving common treatment sequences have suboptimal survival, frequent SAEs, and high HCRU and costs. Interpretation is limited by historical data and residual confounding.","PeriodicalId":12099,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737140.2026.2738626","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Real-world treatment and outcomes for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) are evolving.

Research design and methods: This retrospective study used data from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Database (01/01/2009-12/31/2019). Patients with mCRPC who previously received one androgen receptor pathway inhibitor (ARPI) followed by either a second ARPI (ARPI cohort) or a taxane (taxane cohort) were included. Treatment patterns, serious adverse events (SAEs [based on hospitalization or emergency room (ER) claim]), healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs were evaluated descriptively, with Kaplan-Meier analysis for overall survival (OS).

Results: Of 923 patients, 714 were in the ARPI cohort and 209 in the taxane cohort. Overall, 33.3% vs 53.6% of patients in the ARPI vs taxane cohorts received a subsequent treatment (p < 0.001), most commonly taxanes in both cohorts. Median OS was ≈1 year in both cohorts. SAEs were more frequent in the taxane cohort (66.0% vs 42.2%; p < 0.001). The taxane cohort had more ER, outpatient, and pharmacy visits (p < 0.0001), while the ARPI cohort had more hospitalizations (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Results demonstrate that patients with mCRPC receiving common treatment sequences have suboptimal survival, frequent SAEs, and high HCRU and costs. Interpretation is limited by historical data and residual confounding.

查看原文本刊更多论文

chemotherapy-naïve转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌患者的临床和经济结果

背景：转移性去势抵抗性前列腺癌（mCRPC）患者的现实治疗和预后正在不断发展。研究设计和方法：本回顾性研究使用的数据来自美国监测、流行病学和最终结果-医疗保险数据库（2009年1月1日- 2019年12月31日）。先前接受一种雄激素受体途径抑制剂（ARPI），随后接受第二种ARPI （ARPI队列）或紫杉烷（紫杉烷队列）的mCRPC患者被纳入研究。对治疗模式、严重不良事件（SAEs[基于住院或急诊室（ER）索赔]）、医疗资源利用率（HCRU）和成本进行描述性评估，并对总生存期（OS）进行Kaplan-Meier分析。结果：923例患者中，ARPI组714例，紫杉烷组209例。总体而言，在ARPI组和紫杉烷组中，33.3%和53.6%的患者接受了后续治疗（p p p p）。结论：结果表明，接受常规治疗序列的mCRPC患者的生存期不理想，频繁发生SAEs， HCRU和成本较高。解释受到历史数据和残留混杂因素的限制。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy 医学-肿瘤学

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

3.00%

发文量

100

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy (ISSN 1473-7140) provides expert appraisal and commentary on the major trends in cancer care and highlights the performance of new therapeutic and diagnostic approaches. Coverage includes tumor management, novel medicines, anticancer agents and chemotherapy, biological therapy, cancer vaccines, therapeutic indications, biomarkers and diagnostics, and treatment guidelines. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review, and the journal makes an essential contribution to decision-making in cancer care. Comprehensive coverage in each review is complemented by the unique Expert Review format and includes the following sections: Expert Opinion - a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.