Bayoumi A M, Brown A D, Garber A M
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, and Inner City Health Research Unit, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 Nov 1;92(21):1731-9. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.21.1731.
The costs and side effects of several antiandrogen therapies for advanced prostate cancer differ substantially. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of antiandrogen therapies for advanced prostate cancer.
We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis using a Markov model based on a formal meta-analysis and literature review. The base case was assumed to be a 65-year-old man with a clinically evident, local recurrence of prostate cancer. The model used a societal perspective and a time horizon of 20 years. Six androgen suppression strategies were evaluated: diethylstilbestrol (DES), orchiectomy, a nonsteroidal antiandrogen (NSAA), a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist, and combinations of an NSAA with an LHRH agonist or orchiectomy. Outcome measures were survival, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.
DES, the least expensive therapy, had a discounted lifetime cost of $3600 and the lowest quality-adjusted survival, 4.6 QALYs. At a cost of $7000, orchiectomy was associated with 5.1 QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $7500/QALY relative to DES. All other strategies-LHRH agonists, NSAA, and both combined androgen blockade strategies-had higher costs and lower quality-adjusted survival than orchiectomy. These results were sensitive to the quality of life associated with orchiectomy and the efficacy of combined androgen blockade, and they changed little when prostate-specific antigen results were used to guide therapy. Under a wide range of other assumptions, the cost-effectiveness of orchiectomy relative to DES was consistently less than $20 000/QALY. Androgen suppression therapies were most cost-effective if initiated after patients became symptomatic from prostate metastases.
For men who accept it, orchiectomy is likely to be the most cost-effective androgen suppression strategy. Combined androgen blockade is the least economically attractive option, yielding small health benefits at high relative costs.
几种用于晚期前列腺癌的抗雄激素疗法的成本和副作用差异很大。我们评估了晚期前列腺癌抗雄激素疗法的成本效益。
我们基于正式的荟萃分析和文献综述,使用马尔可夫模型进行了成本效益分析。基础病例假设为一名65岁、临床明显的前列腺癌局部复发患者。该模型采用社会视角,时间跨度为20年。评估了六种雄激素抑制策略:己烯雌酚(DES)、睾丸切除术、非甾体抗雄激素(NSAA)、促黄体激素释放激素(LHRH)激动剂,以及NSAA与LHRH激动剂或睾丸切除术的联合应用。结果指标为生存率、质量调整生命年(QALY)、终身成本和增量成本效益比。
成本最低的疗法DES的贴现终身成本为3600美元,质量调整生存率最低,为4.6个QALY。睾丸切除术成本为7000美元,与5.1个QALY相关,相对于DES的增量成本效益比为7500美元/QALY。所有其他策略——LHRH激动剂、NSAA以及两种联合雄激素阻断策略——的成本都高于睾丸切除术,质量调整生存率则更低。这些结果对与睾丸切除术相关的生活质量以及联合雄激素阻断的疗效敏感,并且当使用前列腺特异性抗原结果指导治疗时变化不大。在一系列其他假设下相对于DES,睾丸切除术的成本效益始终低于20000美元/QALY。如果在患者因前列腺转移出现症状后开始进行雄激素抑制治疗,则最具成本效益。
对于接受睾丸切除术的男性来说,这可能是最具成本效益的雄激素抑制策略。联合雄激素阻断是经济上最缺乏吸引力的选择,在相对高成本的情况下健康获益较小。