Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31158087›Full record

Trial reportEuropean urology oncology2018

Addition of Docetaxel to First-line Long-term Hormone Therapy in Prostate Cancer (STAMPEDE): Modelling to Estimate Long-term Survival, Quality-adjusted Survival, and Cost-effectiveness.

Beth S Woods, Eleftherios Sideris, Matthew R Sydes, Melissa R Gannon, Mahesh K B Parmar, Mymoona Alzouebi, Gerhardt Attard, Alison J Birtle, Susannah Brock, Richard Cathomas and 34 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European urology oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Cost-Effectiveness of Systemic Treatments for Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer: An Economic Evaluation Based on Network Meta-Analysis.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Balancing efficacy and financial toxicity in the management of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

44 authors at 20 institutions in 2 countries.

Beth S WoodsCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK. Electronic address: beth.woods@york.ac.uk.
Eleftherios SiderisCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
Matthew R SydesMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Melissa R GannonMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Mahesh K B ParmarMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Mymoona AlzouebiWeston Park Hospital, Sheffield, UK.
Gerhardt AttardThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Alison J BirtleRosemere Cancer Centre, Royal Preston Hospital, Preston, UK.
Susannah BrockDorset Cancer Centre, Poole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Poole, UK.
Richard CathomasSwiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Bern, Switzerland; Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland.
Prabir R ChakrabortiRoyal Derby Hospital, Derby, UK.
Audrey CookGloucestershire Oncology Centre, Cheltenham, UK.
William R CrossDepartment of Urology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
David P DearnaleyThe Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK; The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Joanna GalePortsmouth Oncology Centre, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK.
Stephanie GibbsBarking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, Romford, UK.
John D GrahamBeacon Centre, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK.
Robert HughesMount Vernon Group, Mount Vernon Hospital, Northwood, UK.
Rob J JonesUniversity of Glasgow, UK.
Robert LaingSt Luke's Cancer Centre, Royal Surrey NHS Trust, Guildford, UK.
Malcolm D MasonSchool of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
David MathesonUniversity of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton, UK.
Duncan B McLarenDepartment of Oncology, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK.
Robin MillmanMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Joe M O'SullivanCentre for Cancer Research and Cell Biology, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Omi ParikhDepartment of Oncology, East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust, Burnley, UK.
Christopher C ParkerThe Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Clive PeedellSouth Tees NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.
Andrew ProtheroeDepartment of Oncology, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Alastair W S RitchieGloucestershire Royal Hospital Foundation Trust, Gloucester, UK.
Angus RobinsonSussex Cancer Centre, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.
J Martin RussellInstitute of Cancer Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK; Forth Valley Royal Hospital, Larbert, UK.
Matthew S SimmsHull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Hull, UK.
Narayanan N SrihariShrewsbury and Telford Hospitals NHS Trust, Shrewsbury, UK.
Rajaguru SrinivasanRoyal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK.
John N StaffurthVelindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff and School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Santhanam SundarUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
George N ThalmannDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Shaun TolanClatterbridge Cancer Centre, Birkenhead, UK.
Anna T H TranThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
David TsangSouthend and Basildon Hospitals, Southend, UK.
John WagstaffSwansea University College of Medicine, Swansea, UK.
Nicholas D JamesQueen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK.
Mark J SculpherCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of York · GBMusgrove Park Hospital · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital · GBThe Christie NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GBBarking, Havering And Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBBasildon Hospital · GBCardiff University · GBChurchill Hospital · GBEast Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust · GBGloucestershire Royal Hospital · GBHull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust · GBInstitute of Cancer Research · GBKantonsspital Graubünden · CHLeeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust · GBMount Vernon Hospital · GBPoole Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBQueen Alexandra Hospital · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 10588Cancer Research UK 12518Cancer Research UK 3804Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/25Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/6
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResults from large randomised controlled trials have shown that adding docetaxel to the standard of care (SOC) for men initiating hormone therapy for prostate cancer (PC) prolongs survival for those with metastatic disease and prolongs failure-free survival for those without. To date there has been no formal assessment of whether funding docetaxel in this setting represents an appropriate use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources.

objectiveTo assess whether administering docetaxel to men with PC starting long-term hormone therapy is cost-effective in a UK setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsWe modelled health outcomes and costs in the UK NHS using data collected within the STAMPEDE trial, which enrolled men with high-risk, locally advanced metastatic or recurrent PC starting first-line hormone therapy.

interventionSOC was hormone therapy for ≥2 yr and radiotherapy in some patients. Docetaxel (75mg/m OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The model generated lifetime predictions of costs, changes in survival duration, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The model predicted that docetaxel would extend survival (discounted quality-adjusted survival) by 0.89 yr (0.51) for metastatic PC and 0.78 yr (0.39) for nonmetastatic PC, and would be cost-effective in metastatic PC (ICER £5514/QALY vs SOC) and nonmetastatic PC (higher QALYs, lower costs vs SOC). Docetaxel remained cost-effective in nonmetastatic PC when the assumption of no survival advantage was modelled.

conclusionsDocetaxel is cost-effective among patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic PC in a UK setting. Clinicians should consider whether the evidence is now sufficiently compelling to support docetaxel use in patients with nonmetastatic PC, as the opportunity to offer docetaxel at hormone therapy initiation will be missed for some patients by the time more mature survival data are available. PATIENT SUMMARY: Starting docetaxel chemotherapy alongside hormone therapy represents a good use of UK National Health Service resources for patients with prostate cancer that is high risk or has spread to other parts of the body.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsDocetaxelHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPrognosisProstatic NeoplasmsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsStandard of CareUnited KingdomDocetaxelCost-effectiveness analysisDocetaxelProstate cancer

Identifiers

PMID31158087
PMCPMC6692495
OpenAlexW2891651688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.