Search

The management of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) has been significantly modified by the availability of innovative but expensive treatments, increasing the economic burden of prostate cancer. Here, we aimed to systematically identify and review published economic evaluations (EEs) related to the treatment of mHSPC and assess their quality. A systematic search was performed of the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Three reviewers independently selected EEs by defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. They extracted all data from each EE (general information, study population, data about the EE, interventions and comparators, and outcomes). They also assessed the quality of the selected EEs according to Drummond's checklist. Fourteen EEs published between 2016 and 2021 were eligible for the systematic review. The EEs found ADT + docetaxel to be the most cost-effective of all available treatments as a first-line strategy for mHSPC (abiraterone acetate plus prednisone, enzalutamide, and apalutamide). Five EEs showed that a simple price reduction of abiraterone acetate of 50% to 75% could change the results to render this treatment also cost-effective relative to that with docetaxel. Twelve EEs were of high quality, with a Drummond score ≥ 7. Analysis of the 14 EEs identified by our systematic review, amongst which 78.6% met high quality standards, showed that ADT + docetaxel tends to be the most cost-effective alternative for mHSPC. These results were assessed by sensitivity analysis. The data provided by this systematic review help to provide a better understanding of these treatments and the better use of healthcare resources., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The optimal therapeutic strategies for patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) followed by metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC), in terms of cost and effectiveness, remains unknown. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of various potential strategies, from the start of first-line treatment in mHSPC to the death of the patients., Methods: Two Markov decision-analysis models were developed, one for cohort A "asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic patients in mCRPC", and one for cohort B "symptomatic patients in mCRPC". Each strategy reflects daily practice for mHSPC until progression in mCRPC from the start of first treatment regimen with either docetaxel or abiraterone acetate plus prednisone (AA) in mHSPC to the death of the patient. The cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the French public health care system perspective. Only direct medical costs were included. Survival data were extracted from results of published randomized clinical trials., Results: For cohort A, docetaxel followed by AA is the most cost-effective therapeutic strategy (€96,925 for 4.24 life-years). For cohort B, docetaxel followed by docetaxel is the most cost-effective therapeutic strategy (€81,463 for 4.05 life-years). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of our results except for a price reduction of 70% for AA or enzalutamide., Conclusion: Our approach is innovative to the extent that our analysis considers various potential strategies for metastatic prostate cancer (mPC). Our economic evaluation suggests that a price reduction of AA or enzalutamide impacts on the results. This approach must continue, including new drugs for patients with mPC., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To compare toxicity and response of docetaxel chemotherapy between metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) and castration-resistant metastatic prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients of the same therapeutic era for assessing of upfront docetaxel against the benchmark of docetaxel in the castrate resistant stage in the setting outside of clinical trials., Methods: A prospectively collected database of real-world prostate cancer patients receiving docetaxel was divided in mHSPC and mCRPC cases and retrospectively analyzed. Principal objectives were toxicity measured by the common criteria of adverse events terminology and response characterized by Prostate specific antigen decline and radiographic progression-free disease at restaging. The prognostic value of suspected variables for grade 3 to 5 toxicity and response was investigated by logistic regression analysis., Results: Of 72 patients 34 (47%) were treated for mHSPC and 38 (53%) for mCRPC. Patients with mCRPC were older and had worse performance status (P< 0.01). In mHSPC total number of grade 3 to 5 adverse events (24, median 0, interquartile range 0-1) was significantly less than in mCRPC (46, median 1, interquartile range 1-2) (P = 0.01). Multivariable analysis revealed age as independent predictive variable for grade 3 to 5 toxicity (P = 0.03) but not disease stage, Prostate specific antigen predocetaxel, volume of disease, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P > 0.05). Objective response was significantly higher in mHSPC compared to mCRPC patients (P < 0.01). Multivariable analysis confirmed mHSPC stage as independent prognostic factor for radiographic progression free disease at restaging (P < 0.01)., Conclusions: The association of age with toxicity and of mHSPC stage with response resulted in significantly fewer grade 3 to 5 adverse events but higher response rates for upfront docetaxel in mHSPC compared with docetaxel in the later mCRPC stage., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are naturally occurring, small, non-coding RNA molecules that post-transcriptionally regulate the expression of a large number of genes involved in various biological processes, either through mRNA degradation or through translation inhibition. Since the discovery of miRNAs, a vast amount of research has implicated the deregulated expression of miRNAs in different malignancies, including prostate cancer (PCa). Different miRNA expression profiles are reportedly associated with the development, progression, and emergence of castration-resistant PCa (CRPC), suggesting their use in the diagnosis, prognosis, and development of anti-cancer treatment models directed against this disease. However, before their exploitation in terms of therapeutics, a thorough understanding and in-depth mechanistic studies of these miRNAs and the gene networks they orchestrate are necessary for ascertaining their definitive role in the development and progression of PCa. This review attempts to extensively summarize the current knowledge of aberrantly expressed miRNAs and their mode of action in PCa, while highlighting the existing discrepancies and future research warranted., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)