Mehmet A Bilen, Benjamin Lowentritt, Ibrahim Khilfeh, Carmine Rossi, Shawn Du, Frederic Kinkead, Lilian Diaz, Dominic Pilon, Lorie Ellis, Neal D Shore
{"title":"阿帕鲁胺与恩杂鲁胺治疗转移性去势敏感前列腺癌的总生存率。","authors":"Mehmet A Bilen, Benjamin Lowentritt, Ibrahim Khilfeh, Carmine Rossi, Shawn Du, Frederic Kinkead, Lilian Diaz, Dominic Pilon, Lorie Ellis, Neal D Shore","doi":"10.1007/s12325-025-03207-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Survival outcomes associated with different androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) prescribed for the treatment of metastatic castration (hormone)-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) have not been directly compared. The objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) by 24 months among ARPI-naïve patients with mCSPC initiating apalutamide or enzalutamide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective, causal longitudinal inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis was conducted to compare OS between patients initiating apalutamide or enzalutamide between December 2019 and December 2023 using de-identified linked US clinical and insurance claims data. Patients were excluded if they had prior exposure to ARPIs, had evidence of castration resistance, had < 12 months of database activity prior to ARPI initiation, were diagnosed with other primary cancers, or were treated with other advanced prostate cancer (PC)-related treatment (except docetaxel). Using an intention-to-treat approach, weighted Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare OS by 24 months between patients treated with apalutamide or enzalutamide (primary analyses; exploratory analyses used all available follow-up).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 1810 and 1909 ARPI-naïve patients who initiated apalutamide or enzalutamide, respectively, were included. Measured baseline characteristics between cohorts were well balanced after weighting (for both: mean age 73.0 years, ~ 60% white, ~ 23% black or African American, ~ 78% Medicare-insured, mean Quan-CCI 8.6, ~ 20% with visceral metastasis, 56.2% with de novo PC). At 24 months post index, there was a statistically significant 23% reduction in the risk of mortality among patients who initiated apalutamide compared with enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62, 0.96; p = 0.019). Results remained consistent when using all available follow-up metrics (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.64, 0.93; nominal p = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this head-to-head causal analysis among ARPI-naïve patients with mCSPC, treatment with apalutamide resulted in better survival outcomes at 24 months compared with enzalutamide. Longer follow-up studies are required to fully determine the therapeutic comparator impact of these agents.</p>","PeriodicalId":7482,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Therapy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Overall Survival with Apalutamide Versus Enzalutamide in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Mehmet A Bilen, Benjamin Lowentritt, Ibrahim Khilfeh, Carmine Rossi, Shawn Du, Frederic Kinkead, Lilian Diaz, Dominic Pilon, Lorie Ellis, Neal D Shore\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12325-025-03207-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Survival outcomes associated with different androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) prescribed for the treatment of metastatic castration (hormone)-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) have not been directly compared. The objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) by 24 months among ARPI-naïve patients with mCSPC initiating apalutamide or enzalutamide.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective, causal longitudinal inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis was conducted to compare OS between patients initiating apalutamide or enzalutamide between December 2019 and December 2023 using de-identified linked US clinical and insurance claims data. Patients were excluded if they had prior exposure to ARPIs, had evidence of castration resistance, had < 12 months of database activity prior to ARPI initiation, were diagnosed with other primary cancers, or were treated with other advanced prostate cancer (PC)-related treatment (except docetaxel). Using an intention-to-treat approach, weighted Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare OS by 24 months between patients treated with apalutamide or enzalutamide (primary analyses; exploratory analyses used all available follow-up).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 1810 and 1909 ARPI-naïve patients who initiated apalutamide or enzalutamide, respectively, were included. Measured baseline characteristics between cohorts were well balanced after weighting (for both: mean age 73.0 years, ~ 60% white, ~ 23% black or African American, ~ 78% Medicare-insured, mean Quan-CCI 8.6, ~ 20% with visceral metastasis, 56.2% with de novo PC). At 24 months post index, there was a statistically significant 23% reduction in the risk of mortality among patients who initiated apalutamide compared with enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62, 0.96; p = 0.019). Results remained consistent when using all available follow-up metrics (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.64, 0.93; nominal p = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this head-to-head causal analysis among ARPI-naïve patients with mCSPC, treatment with apalutamide resulted in better survival outcomes at 24 months compared with enzalutamide. Longer follow-up studies are required to fully determine the therapeutic comparator impact of these agents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-025-03207-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-025-03207-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Overall Survival with Apalutamide Versus Enzalutamide in Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.
Introduction: Survival outcomes associated with different androgen receptor pathway inhibitors (ARPIs) prescribed for the treatment of metastatic castration (hormone)-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) have not been directly compared. The objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) by 24 months among ARPI-naïve patients with mCSPC initiating apalutamide or enzalutamide.
Methods: A retrospective, causal longitudinal inverse probability of treatment weighted analysis was conducted to compare OS between patients initiating apalutamide or enzalutamide between December 2019 and December 2023 using de-identified linked US clinical and insurance claims data. Patients were excluded if they had prior exposure to ARPIs, had evidence of castration resistance, had < 12 months of database activity prior to ARPI initiation, were diagnosed with other primary cancers, or were treated with other advanced prostate cancer (PC)-related treatment (except docetaxel). Using an intention-to-treat approach, weighted Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare OS by 24 months between patients treated with apalutamide or enzalutamide (primary analyses; exploratory analyses used all available follow-up).
Results: Overall, 1810 and 1909 ARPI-naïve patients who initiated apalutamide or enzalutamide, respectively, were included. Measured baseline characteristics between cohorts were well balanced after weighting (for both: mean age 73.0 years, ~ 60% white, ~ 23% black or African American, ~ 78% Medicare-insured, mean Quan-CCI 8.6, ~ 20% with visceral metastasis, 56.2% with de novo PC). At 24 months post index, there was a statistically significant 23% reduction in the risk of mortality among patients who initiated apalutamide compared with enzalutamide (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62, 0.96; p = 0.019). Results remained consistent when using all available follow-up metrics (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.64, 0.93; nominal p = 0.008).
Conclusion: In this head-to-head causal analysis among ARPI-naïve patients with mCSPC, treatment with apalutamide resulted in better survival outcomes at 24 months compared with enzalutamide. Longer follow-up studies are required to fully determine the therapeutic comparator impact of these agents.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Therapy is an international, peer reviewed, rapid-publication (peer review in 2 weeks, published 3–4 weeks from acceptance) journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of therapeutics and interventions (including devices) across all therapeutic areas. Studies relating to diagnostics and diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, epidemiology, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged.
The journal is of interest to a broad audience of healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, communications and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from all over the world. Advances in Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.