Background: Health care policies, including drug-funding policies, influence physician practice. Funding policies are especially important in the area of cancer care since cancer is a leading cause of death that is responsible for a significant level of health care expenditures. Recognizing the rising cost of cancer therapies, Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) established a funding process to provide access to new, effective agents through a "New Drug Funding Program" (NDFP). The purpose of this study is to describe oncologists' perceptions of the impact of NDFP priority setting decisions on their practice.
Introduction: In the TROPIC study, cabazitaxel improved overall survival in abiraterone-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients post-docetaxel. To evaluate cabazitaxel in routine clinical practice, an international, single-arm trial was conducted. Efficacy, safety, and quality of life (QoL) data were collected from Canadian patients enrolled. Overall survival and progression-free survival were not collected as part of this study. Importantly, prior abiraterone use was obtained and its impact on clinical parameters was examined. Methods: Sixty-one patients from nine Canadian centres were enrolled, with prior abiraterone use known for 60 patients. Prostatespecific antigen (PSA) response rate, safety, and impact on QoL life were analyzed as a function of prior abiraterone use. Results: Overall, 92% of patients were ECOG 0/1, 88% had bone metastases, and 25% visceral metastases. Patients treated without prior abiraterone (NoPriorAbi) (n=35, 58%) and with prior abiraterone (PriorAbi) (n=25, 42%) had similar baseline characteristics, except for age and prior cumulative docetaxel dose. Median number of cabazitaxel cycles received was similar between groups (NoPriorAbi=6, PriorAbi=7), as was PSA response rate (NoPriorAbi=36.4%, PriorAbi=45.0%, p=0.54). Almost one-third (31%) of patients received prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors. Most frequent Grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (14.8%); anemia, febrile neutropenia, fatigue (each at 9.8%); and diarrhea (8.2%). No treatment-related adverse event leading to death was observed. QoL and pain were improved with no difference seen between groups. Treatment discontinuation was mainly due to disease progression (45.9%) and adverse events (32.8%).
Conclusions:In routine clinical practice, cabazitaxel's risk-benefit ratio in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel seems to be maintained independent of prior abiraterone use.
Introduction: Cabazitaxel is one of several treatment options available for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who have progressed on docetaxel. Little is known about clinical factors that influence prognosis or treatment response for patients receiving cabazitaxel. Identifying prognostic and predictive factors could contribute to the optimal selection of patients for treatment after docetaxel. Methods: A retrospective review of patients enrolled on the cabazitaxel Canadian Early Access Program (C-EAP) was performed. Clinical factors were analyzed by univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors of prognosis and response. Results: Forty-five patients from five centres in Canada were included in this study. On multivariable analysis, lower hemoglobin was associated with shorter survival. No other factors were independently associated with survival, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response or primary PSA progression. Conclusions: Clinical factors predicting survival or treatment response were not identified for men with castration-resistant prostate cancer receiving cabazitaxel. Larger studies may be necessary to identify clinical factors and biomarkers that identify whether patients should or should not receive cabazitaxel.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.