Skip to main content
Log in

Cabazitaxel for Hormone-Relapsed Metastatic Prostate Cancer Previously Treated With a Docetaxel-Containing Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

  • Review Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the company that manufactures cabazitaxel (Jevtana®, Sanofi, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cabazitaxel for treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer (mHRPC) previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology based upon the company’s submission to NICE. Clinical evidence for cabazitaxel was derived from a multinational randomised open-label phase III trial (TROPIC) of cabazitaxel plus prednisone or prednisolone compared with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisolone, which was assumed to represent best supportive care. The NICE final scope identified a further three comparators: abiraterone in combination with prednisone or prednisolone; enzalutamide; and radium-223 dichloride for the subgroup of people with bone metastasis only (no visceral metastasis). The company did not consider radium-223 dichloride to be a relevant comparator. Neither abiraterone nor enzalutamide has been directly compared in a trial with cabazitaxel. Instead, clinical evidence was synthesised within a network meta-analysis (NMA). Results from TROPIC showed that cabazitaxel was associated with a statistically significant improvement in both overall survival and progression-free survival compared with mitoxantrone. Results from a random-effects NMA, as conducted by the company and updated by the ERG, indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the three active treatments for both overall survival and progression-free survival. Utility data were not collected as part of the TROPIC trial, and were instead taken from the company’s UK early access programme. Evidence on resource use came from the TROPIC trial, supplemented by both expert clinical opinion and a UK clinical audit. List prices were used for mitoxantrone, abiraterone and enzalutamide as directed by NICE, although commercial in-confidence patient-access schemes (PASs) are in place for abiraterone and enzalutamide. The confidential PAS was used for cabazitaxel. Sequential use of the advanced hormonal therapies (abiraterone and enzalutamide) does not usually occur in clinical practice in the UK. Hence, cabazitaxel could be used within two pathways of care: either when an advanced hormonal therapy was used pre-docetaxel, or when one was used post-docetaxel. The company believed that the former pathway was more likely to represent standard National Health Service (NHS) practice, and so their main comparison was between cabazitaxel and mitoxantrone, with effectiveness data from the TROPIC trial. Results of the company’s updated cost-effectiveness analysis estimated a probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £45,982 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, which the committee considered to be the most plausible value for this comparison. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be both cheaper and more effective than abiraterone. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be cheaper but less effective than enzalutamide, resulting in an ICER of £212,038 per QALY gained for enzalutamide compared with cabazitaxel. The ERG noted that radium-223 is a valid comparator (for the indicated sub-group), and that it may be used in either of the two care pathways. Hence, its exclusion leads to uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results. In addition, the company assumed that there would be no drug wastage when cabazitaxel was used, with cost-effectiveness results being sensitive to this assumption: modelling drug wastage increased the ICER comparing cabazitaxel with mitoxantrone to over £55,000 per QALY gained. The ERG updated the company’s NMA and used a random effects model to perform a fully incremental analysis between cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and best supportive care using PASs for abiraterone and enzalutamide. Results showed that both cabazitaxel and abiraterone were extendedly dominated by the combination of best supportive care and enzalutamide. Preliminary guidance from the committee, which included wastage of cabazitaxel, did not recommend its use. In response, the company provided both a further discount to the confidential PAS for cabazitaxel and confirmation from NHS England that it is appropriate to supply and purchase cabazitaxel in pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags, which would remove the cost of drug wastage. As a result, the committee recommended use of cabazitaxel as a treatment option in people with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 whose disease had progressed during or after treatment with at least 225 mg/m2 of docetaxel, as long as it was provided at the discount agreed in the PAS and purchased in either pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags or in vials at a reduced price to reflect the average per-patient drug wastage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Cabazitaxel for hormone-relapsed metastatic prostate cancer previously treated with a docetaxel—NICE technology appraisal guidance [TA391]. 2015. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta391. Accessed 17 Oct 2016.

  2. Cancer Research UK. Prostate Cancer Statistics. Available from: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/prostate-cancer. Accessed 17 Oct 2016.

  3. National Cancer Intelligence Network. Survival by stage 2012. Published July 2014. Available from: http://www.ncin.org.uk/publications/survival_by_stage. Accessed 17 Oct 2016.

  4. West TA, Kiely BE, Stockler MR. Estimating scenarios for survival time in men starting systemic therapies for castration-resistant prostate cancer: a systematic review of randomised trials. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(11):1916–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. European Medicines Agency (EMA). Assessment report for Jevtana (cabazitaxel) procedure no.: EMEA/H/C/0020182011. 20 January 2011. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Public_assessment_report/human/002018/WC500104766.pdf. Accessed 17 Oct 2016.

  6. Kearns B, Lloyd Jones M, Stevenson M, Littlewood C. Cabazitaxel for the second-line treatment of metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer: a NICE single technology appraisal. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31(6):479–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. NHS England. National Cancer Drugs Fund List Version 5.1. Published March 2015. Available from: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/ncdf-list-mar-15.pdf. Accessed 11 Nov 2015.

  8. de Bono JS, Oudard S, Ozguroglu M, Hansen S, Machiels JP, Kocak I, et al. Prednisone plus cabazitaxel or mitoxantrone for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer progressing after docetaxel treatment: a randomised open-label trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9747):1147–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bahl A, Masson S, Malik Z, Birtle AJ, Sundar S, Jones RJ, et al. Final quality of life and safety data for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with cabazitaxel in the UK Early Access Programme (EAP) (NCT01254279). BJU Int. 2015;116(6):880–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Green AK, Corty RW, Wood WA, Meeneghan M, Reeder-Hayes KE, Basch E, et al. Comparative effectiveness of mitoxantrone plus prednisone versus prednisone alone in metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer after docetaxel failure. Oncologist. 2015;20(5):516–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Scher HI, Fizazi K, Saad F, Taplin ME, Sternberg CN, Miller K, et al. Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(13):1187–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fizazi K, Scher HI, Molina A, Logothetis CJ, Chi KN, Jones RJ, et al. Abiraterone acetate for treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: final overall survival analysis of the COU-AA-301 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13(10):983–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Goddard A. Professional expert submission to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Cabazitaxel for hormone-relapsed metastatic prostate cancer previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen (review of TA255) [ID889]. NCRI/RCP/RCR/ACP. 2015.

  14. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Technology appraisal guidance [TA412] - radium-223 dichloride for treating hormone-relapsed prostate cancer with bone metastases. September 2016. NICE, London. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta412. Accessed 19 Oct 2016.

  15. British National Formulary. BNF June 2015. Available from: http://www.bnf.org/. Accessed 11 Nov 2015.

  16. Dias S, Sutton AJ, Welton NJ, Ades AE. Evidence synthesis for decision making 3 heterogeneity-subgroups, meta-regression, bias, and bias-adjustment. Med Decis Making. 2013;33(5):618–40.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Jansen JP. Network meta-analysis of survival data with fractional polynomials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Briggs AH, Weinstein MC, Fenwick EA, Karnon J, Sculpher MJ, Paltiel AD, et al. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force Working Group-6. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):722–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. James ND, Sydes MR, Clarke NW, Mason MD, Dearnaley DP, Spears MR, et al. Addition of docetaxel, zoledronic acid, or both to first-line long-term hormone therapy in prostate cancer (STAMPEDE): survival results from an adaptive, multiarm, multistage, platform randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10024):1163–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin Kearns.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This Project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Programme (Project number 15/69/13). See the HTA programme website for further project information (http://www.hta.ac.uk). This summary of the ERG report was compiled after NICE issued the FAD. All authors have commented on the submitted manuscript and have given their approval for the final version to be published. The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR HTA Programme. Any errors are the responsibility of the authors.

Contributors

BK drafted the final version of the manuscript and takes responsibility as the overall guarantor of the content. All authors have commented on the submitted manuscript and have given their approval for the final version to be published. BK and MS reviewed the cost-effectiveness evidence, AP and DC reviewed the clinical effectiveness evidence, JS reviewed statistical analyses, MC reviewed search strategies. JG and M.SK provided clinical input and advice. This summary has not been externally reviewed by PharmacoEconomics.

Conflict of interest

BK, AP, MS, JH, DC, MC, JG and M.SK have no potential conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kearns, B., Pandor, A., Stevenson, M. et al. Cabazitaxel for Hormone-Relapsed Metastatic Prostate Cancer Previously Treated With a Docetaxel-Containing Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal. PharmacoEconomics 35, 415–424 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0457-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-016-0457-1

Keywords

Navigation