Overall survival, costs, and healthcare resource use by line of therapy in Medicare patients with newly diagnosed metastatic urothelial carcinoma

Abstract

Aims: Medicare patients with metastatic or surgically unresectable urothelial carcinoma (mUC) often receive platinum-based chemotherapy as first line of therapy (LOT), but invariably progress, requiring additional LOTs and healthcare resource use (HCRU). To better understand the evolving mUC treatment landscape, the economic burden of chemotherapy-based mUC treatments among US Medicare patients was estimated. Methods: Newly diagnosed Medicare patients with mUC were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. Patients were followed from diagnosis to death, disenrollment, or end of study to characterize LOTs (first [LOT1], second [LOT2], and third or greater [LOT3+]). Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate overall survival (OS) by LOT. HCRU and mean costs were reported over the follow-up period, LOT duration, and maximum LOT received. Results: Among 1,873 eligible patients with mUC (median age = 77 years; median follow-up = 7.5 months), 1,035 (55%) received no chemotherapy. Among chemotherapy-treated patients, 61% had LOT1 only, 25% had LOT1 and LOT2 only, and 14% had LOT3+. Median OS was 8.1 months, range was 4.3 (untreated) to 29.8 (LOT3+) months. HCRU frequency increased with additional LOTs. Mean cumulative per-patient cost was $82,912 for all patients, increasing with additional LOTs (untreated = $57,207; LOT1 = $99,213; LOT2 = $125,190; LOT3+ = $163,884). Mean per patient per month cost was $18,827 for all patients, decreasing with increasing number of LOTs received (untreated = $27,211; LOT1 = $9,601; LOT2 = $7,325; LOT3+ = $6,017). Limitations: Potential for treatment misclassification when using the algorithm defining LOTs and non-generalizability of results to younger patients. Conclusions: Over 50% of Medicare patients with mUC received no chemotherapy. Among chemotherapy-treated patients, most received only one LOT. Additional LOTs led to higher mean costs and HCRU, but as patients were followed longer, monthly costs decreased. As treatments evolve to include immuno-oncology agents, these findings provide a clinically relevant economic benchmark for mUC treatment across different traditional LOTs.

Keywords: A10; E37; Metastatic urothelial carcinoma; SEER-Medicare; economic burden; healthcare resource use; line of therapy.

Figure 1.

Cost attribution to each line of therapy (LOT) according to main (top panel) and sensitivity analysis (bottom panel).

Figure 2.

Patient selection flowchart. Abbreviations: dx, diagnosis; HMO, health maintenance organization.

Figure 3.

Mean healthcare cost per patient by line of therapy (LOT) over duration of LOT and pretreatment phase. These estimates are not the unit costs of each healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). Rather, they represent the total cost of each HCRU category divided by the number of patients in our sample, regardless of whether or not they have used each resource. Abbreviations: CT, computed tomography; ED, emergency room; ICU, intensive care unit; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging.