Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of the Efficacy of Apalutamide and Enzalutamide with ADT in the Treatment of Non-Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

Introduction: Apalutamide and enzalutamide are next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors that demonstrated efficacy in placebo-controlled studies (SPARTAN for apalutamide; PROSPER for enzalutamide) when used in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for treatment of non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). In the absence of comparative studies between these agents, the present study sought to indirectly compare metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with nmCRPC who received these therapies.

Methods: Individual patient-level data from SPARTAN (apalutamide plus ADT) and published data from PROSPER (enzalutamide plus ADT) were utilized.

Total cost of care for castration-resistant prostate cancer in a commercially insured population and a medicare supplemental insured population.

The total cost of healthcare for patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) is an important component for assessing value of treatment options. The need for real-world evidence has increased with the introduction of oral targeted therapies for metastatic and nonmetastatic disease. In this study, we examined patient healthcare costs during periods of nonmetastatic CRPC (nmCRPC) and metastatic CRPC (mCRPC).

Medication Adherence, Treatment Patterns, and Dose Reduction in Patients with Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Receiving Abiraterone Acetate or Enzalutamide.

Background: The efficacy of and overall survival associated with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) treatments rely on patients' consistent adherence to the recommended dosage regimens.

Objectives: To evaluate treatment patterns and patient adherence to abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide therapy in real-world practice, and to examine the factors that may be associated with medication dose reduction in patients with metastatic CRPC.

Methods: Retrospective analyses were conducted using the Truven Health MarketScan research databases among patients with metastatic CRPC who initiated treatment with abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide between October 1, 2012, and December 31, 2014 (index date).

Assessment of Real-World Central Nervous System Events in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer Using Abiraterone Acetate, Bicalutamide, Enzalutamide, or Chemotherapy.

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) events are frequently reported among patients with advanced prostate cancer as a consequence of the treatments used in this patient population.

Objective: To assess the incidence of CNS events in patients with advanced prostate cancer who initiated treatment with abiraterone acetate, bicalutamide, enzalutamide, or chemotherapy.

Methods: The Truven Health MarketScan Research databases were used to retrospectively identify patients with prostate cancer who initiated treatment with abiraterone acetate, enzalutamide, bicalutamide, or chemotherapy after September 1, 2012 (ie, the index date).

Assessment of Evidence-Based Standards in the Treatment of Advanced Prostate Cancer in a Community Practice.

Introduction: Although the monitoring of patients with advanced prostate cancer is essential to optimize treatment, little is known about adherence to guidelines. In this study we compared testing practices at an integrated urology/radiation oncology group practice with evidence-based guidelines and best practices.

Methods: Electronic medical records up to December 2014 from the integrated urology/radiation oncology group practice were queried to identify patients who received androgen deprivation therapy and in whom advanced disease was staged as androgen deprivation therapy sensitive, subcastration resistant (incompletely defined probable castration resistant prostate cancer) or castration resistant after April 2011 and for 6 months or more.

Duration of Treatment in Prostate Cancer Patients Treated with Abiraterone Acetate or Enzalutamide.

Background: Abiraterone acetate (AA) and enzalutamide (ENZ) are oral therapies offering survival benefit to metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Despite the availability of multiple treatment options for mCRPC, there is a lack of information on the effect that being initiated on AA or ENZ has on the combined prostate cancer treatment duration.

Objective: To compare the combined duration of prostate cancer treatments of patients initiated on AA with that of patients initiated on ENZ.

Estimating the Size and Cost of the STD Prevention Services Safety Net.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is expected to reduce the number of uninsured people in the United States during the next eight years, but more than 10% are expected to remain uninsured. Uninsured people are one of the main populations using publicly funded safety net sexually transmitted disease (STD) prevention services. Estimating the proportion of the uninsured population expected to need STD services could help identify the potential demand for safety net STD services and improve program planning.

Comparative efficacy and safety of daclatasvir/asunaprevir versus IFN-based regimens in genotype 1b hepatitis C virus infection.

Aim: Efficacy and safety comparison of daclatasvir/asunaprevir (DCV + ASV) versus peginterferon-α/ribavirin (A/R) alone or combined with telaprevir, boceprevir, simeprevir or sofosbuvir in chronic genotype 1b hepatitis C virus infection.

Methods: Network meta-analysis (NMA) and matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs).

Results: Among treatment-naive patients, DCV + ASV demonstrated higher sustained virologic response (SVR) rates than telaprevir + A/R, boceprevir + A/R and A/R in NMA and MAICs and simeprevir + A/R in NMA.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for KRAS and BRAF mutations in metastatic colorectal cancer.

Background: In 2009, the American Society of Clinical Oncology recommended that patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are candidates for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy have their tumors tested for KRAS mutations because tumors with such mutations do not respond to anti-EGFR therapy. Limiting anti-EGFR therapy to those without KRAS mutations will reserve treatment for those likely to benefit while avoiding unnecessary costs and harm to those who would not. Similarly, tumors with BRAF genetic mutations may not respond to anti-EGFR therapy, though this is less clear.