Cost-effectiveness analysis of primary treatments for localised prostate cancer: A population-based Markov analysis using real-world evidence
Menée aux Etats-Unis dans un contexte de vie réelle, cette étude analyse le rapport coût-efficacité des traitements de première ligne (prostatectomie radicale, curiethérapie, radiothérapie par faisceau d'électrons, ...) chez des patients atteints d'un cancer localisé de la prostate
Objective : We evaluate cost-effectiveness of primary treatments for localised prostate cancer by uniquely combining prospectively collected real-world outcomes and costs from UCSF Cancer of Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE™). Methods : Markov models assessed cost-effectiveness of radical prostatectomy (RP), brachytherapy, electron beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy with EBRT by risk from US payers perspective over 8 years. Treatment costs included office visits, hospitalisation, procedures, medication and long-term care. Patients' surveyed HRQoL were mapped into utilities. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) used cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY. Results : Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) showed for low-risk prostate cancer, EBRT dominated the lowest cost brachytherapy, but RPns and brachytherapy plus EBRT were cost-effective compared to brachytherapy with ICERs of $18,926 and $41,662 per QALY. In medium-risk patients, RP, EBRT and brachytherapy plus EBRT all were cost-effective compared with brachytherapy, with ICERs of $30,604, $22,588 and $21,627/QALY. In high-risk, brachytherapy dominated all treatments. Procedure cost and utility are driving ICER, but probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed the model was robust across variables. Conclusion : This first CEA combining prospective real-world evidence for HRQOL outcomes with costs shows cost-effectiveness of treatments vary by risk groups, providing new evidence for treatment decisions.