Therapeutic Options in Docetaxel-Refractory Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Lixian Zhong, Vickie Pon, Sandy Srinivas, Nicole Nguyen, Meghan Frear, Sherry Kwon, Cynthia Gong, Robert Malmstrom, Leslie Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

30 Scopus citations


Background:Docetaxel is an established first-line therapy to treat metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Recently, abiraterone and cabazitaxel were approved for use after docetaxel failure, with improved survival. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) preliminary recommendations were negative for both abiraterone (now positive in final recommendation) and cabazitaxel (negative in final recommendation).Objective:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of abiraterone, cabazitaxel, mitoxantrone and prednisone for mCRPC treatment in US.Methods:A decision-tree model was constructed to compare the two mCRPC treatments versus two placebos over 18 months from a societal perspective. Chance nodes include baseline pain as a severity indicator, grade III/IV side-effects, and survival at 18 months. Probabilities, survival and health utilities were from published studies. Model cost inputs included drug treatment, side-effect management and prevention, radiation for pain, and death associated costs in 2010 US dollars.Results:Abiraterone is a cost-effective choice at $94K/QALY (quality adjusted life years) compared to placebo in our base-case analysis. Cabazitaxel and abiraterone are the most effective, yet also most expensive agents. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) at base-case are $101K/QALY (extended dominated) for mitoxantrone vs. placebo, $91K/QALY for abiraterone vs. mitoxantrone, $956K/QALY for cabazitaxel vs. abiraterone. Abiraterone becomes less cost-effective as its AWP increases, or if the cost of mitoxantrone side-effect management decreases. Increases in the percentage of patients with baseline pain leads to an increased ICER for both mitoxantrone and abiraterone, but mitoxantrone does relatively better. Cabazitaxel remains not cost-effective.Conclusion:Our base case model suggests that abiraterone is a cost-effective option in docetaxel-refractory mCRPC patients. Newer treatments will also need a CEA assessment compared to abiraterone.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere64275
JournalPLoS ONE
Issue number5
StatePublished - May 22 2013

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General


Dive into the research topics of 'Therapeutic Options in Docetaxel-Refractory Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this