Ying Chen,1 Jiahua Pan,2 Yan Zhong,3 Bin Wu,1 Mengxia Yan,4 Ruiyun Zhang2 

1Clinical Research Institute, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200000, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Urology, Renji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200000, People’s Republic of China; 3China Association for Promotion of Health Science and Technology, Beijing, 100000, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Pharmacy, Ningbo Hangzhou Bay Hospital, Ningbo, 315000, People’s Republic of China

Correspondence: Ruiyun Zhang, Email 19610@renji.com

Objective: Prostate Cancer can be treated with various formulations of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonists (GnRHa), but cost analyses of these treatments in China are lacking. This study aims to evaluate the differences in cost and resource utilization between various formulations of GnRHa for Prostate Cancer by conducting a resource utilization assessment and cost minimization analysis.
Methods: From the perspective of society and medical healthcare, this study used the cost minimization model to generate cost and resource estimates for GnRHa drug acquisition and administration for “Current practice” and for a “Base case” scenario. In the “Base case” scenario, all of the patients who were receiving 1-monthly or 3-monthly GnRHa therapy in “Current practice” switched to a 6-monthly formulation triptorelin. Cost/Resource estimates were calculated per patient per administration and scaled to annualized population levels. Deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the uncertainty of the model variables and applied assumptions.
Results: From a societal perspective, if all 1-monthly and 3-monthly formulations of GnRHa were switched to a 6-monthly formulation triptorelin, it is conservatively estimated that the annual societal cost could be reduced by ¥ 13,382,951.13, with an average annual cost savings of ¥ 46.53 per patient. Additionally, the 6-monthly formulation could save 3,608,973.91 hours annually, translating to an average time savings of 12.55 hours per patient, reducing treatment time by 78%. From a healthcare system perspective, if the introduction of the 6-monthly formulation of GnRHa is delayed, it would lead to an annual increase of ¥ 94 million in medical costs, and require an additional 64,445.96 working days for doctors and nurses. Deterministic sensitivity analysis demonstrated the model’s robustness, showing the 6-monthly GnRHa remains cost-effective across various parameter changes, with drug price being the most influential factor.
Conclusion: Compared to current 1-monthly and 3-monthly formulations, the 6-monthly GnRHa can reduce the total burden associated with prostate cancer treatment.

Keywords: triptorelin, prostate cancer, cost-minimization, budget impact