Treatment-Related Healthcare Costs of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Germany: A Claims Data Study

Downloadstatistik des Dokuments (Auswertung nach COUNTER):

Kreis, Kristine; Horenkamp-Sonntag, Dirk; Schneider, Udo; Zeidler, Jan; Glaeske, Gerd; Weissbach, Lothar: Treatment-Related Healthcare Costs of Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Germany: A Claims Data Study. In: PharmacoEconomics Open 5 (2021), S. 299-310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41669-020-00219-6

Version im Repositorium

Zum Zitieren der Version im Repositorium verwenden Sie bitte diesen DOI: https://doi.org/10.15488/9955

Zeitraum, für den die Download-Zahlen angezeigt werden:

Jahr: 
Monat: 

Summe der Downloads: 170




Kleine Vorschau
Zusammenfassung: 
Purpose: Treatments for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) have expanded rapidly. They include the chemotherapies docetaxel and cabazitaxel, hormonal drugs abiraterone and enzalutamide, and best supportive care (BSC). Cabazitaxel has proven to be the last life-prolonging option, associated with a significant risk of serious adverse events. Given the lack of real-world evidence, we aimed to compare healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in patients with mCRPC treated with cabazitaxel, docetaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide, and BSC. Methods: We used 2014–2017 claims data from a large German statutory health insurance fund, the Techniker Krankenkasse, to identify patients with mCRPC. Patient allocation to individual therapy regimens was based on clinical knowledge and included therapy cycles, duration of therapy, and continuous treatment. The study period lasted from the first claim until death, the end of data availability, a drug switch, or discontinuation of therapy, whichever came first. Multivariate regression models were used to compare monthly all-cause and mCRPC-related HRU and costs across cohorts by adjusting for baseline covariates (including age and comorbidities). Results: The 3944 identified patients with mCRPC initiated treatment with cabazitaxel (n = 240), docetaxel (n = 539), abiraterone (n = 486), enzalutamide (n = 351), or BSC (n = 2328). In most domains, HRU was highest in the cabazitaxel cohort and lowest in the BSC group. Accordingly, the highest all-cause and mCRPC-related costs per month, respectively, were observed in patients receiving cabazitaxel (€7631/€6343), followed by abiraterone (€5226/€4579), enzalutamide (€5079/€4416), docetaxel (€2392/€1580), and BSC (€959/€438). Cost variations were mostly attributable to drugs, inpatient treatment, and sick leave payments. Conclusion: mCRPC treatment imposes a high economic burden on statutory health insurance. Cabazitaxel is associated with substantially higher expenses, resulting from higher drug costs and a greater need for inpatient treatment. As mCRPC continues to be incurable, decision makers and clinician leaders should carefully evaluate public access to innovative agents and optimal treatment strategies.
Lizenzbestimmungen: CC BY-NC 4.0 Unported
Publikationstyp: Article
Publikationsstatus: publishedVersion
Erstveröffentlichung: 2021
Die Publikation erscheint in Sammlung(en):Forschungszentren

Verteilung der Downloads über den gewählten Zeitraum:

Herkunft der Downloads nach Ländern:

Pos. Land Downloads
Anzahl Proz.
1 image of flag of Germany Germany 81 47,65%
2 image of flag of United States United States 35 20,59%
3 image of flag of China China 8 4,71%
4 image of flag of France France 4 2,35%
5 image of flag of Russian Federation Russian Federation 3 1,76%
6 image of flag of Czech Republic Czech Republic 3 1,76%
7 image of flag of Belarus Belarus 3 1,76%
8 image of flag of Brazil Brazil 2 1,18%
9 image of flag of Australia Australia 2 1,18%
10 image of flag of Austria Austria 2 1,18%
    andere 27 15,88%

Weitere Download-Zahlen und Ranglisten:


Hinweis

Zur Erhebung der Downloadstatistiken kommen entsprechend dem „COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources“ international anerkannte Regeln und Normen zur Anwendung. COUNTER ist eine internationale Non-Profit-Organisation, in der Bibliotheksverbände, Datenbankanbieter und Verlage gemeinsam an Standards zur Erhebung, Speicherung und Verarbeitung von Nutzungsdaten elektronischer Ressourcen arbeiten, welche so Objektivität und Vergleichbarkeit gewährleisten sollen. Es werden hierbei ausschließlich Zugriffe auf die entsprechenden Volltexte ausgewertet, keine Aufrufe der Website an sich.