Table 1.
Definitions of prostate cancer clinical states comprising the dynamic transition model.
Table 2.
Data sources used to determine the hazard rates for progression-free survival and overall survival associated with each clinical state, and the survival estimates derived from these publications for inclusion into the model.
Table 3.
Annual progression and mortality rates for the base-case model in 2009 and 2020 projections.
Fig 1.
Structure and results of the dynamic progression model depicting patient flow between the distinct prostate cancer clinical states in the base-case model from 1990 to 2009.
The model highlights movement to clinical states that have higher mortality rates. Improvement in progression-free survival of men in the nmCRPC scenario reduces the number of patients transitioning from nmCRPC into the mCRPC population, where mortality risk is highest and, as such, has a more permanent impact on mCRPC mortality. *Weighted averages of patents diagnosed with localized, locally advanced, and metastatic disease. **Localized disease or locally advanced disease. nmCRPC, non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; mCRPC, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Table 4.
Outcomes in hypothetical scenarios: novel therapy introduced in 2015 for early nmCRPC, mCRPC, or combined scenarios.
Fig 2.
Impact of hypothetical novel treatment in 2015 for early-stage nmCRPC, mCRPC, and combined scenario. (A) mCRPC incidence, (B) mCRPC prevalence, and (C) mCRPC mortality.
The reduction in mCRPC incidence would lead to lower mCRPC prevalence and a sustained decline in mCRPC mortality. nmCRPC, non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; mCRPC, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.