CHARACTERIZATION OF PATIENTS WITH PROSTATE CANCER IN COLOMBIA FROM A REAL-WORLD MULTICENTER FROM A HEALTHCARE RESOURCE UTILIZATION (HRU) STUDY
Author(s)
Manuel R. Roa, MD, MSc1, Jose Daza-Vergara, MD, MSc2, Uriel Palacios Barahona, PhD2, Claudia A. López-Cabra, MD, MSc1, Fernando E. Salcedo Mejía, BEc, MSc3, Lina M. Moyano, BEcon4, Rosmery V. Barroso, BEcon4, Liliana Torres, MD, MSc1, RAY MANNEH, MD, Oncologist5, Sergio I. Prada, PhD6, Angela Maria Paredes, MD7, Nelson R. Alvis Zakzuk, MBA4, Nelson José Alvis Zakzuk, MSc8;
1Bayer, Bogota, Colombia, 2Hospital Universitario Mayor Mederi - Universidad del Rosario, Bogota, Colombia, 3ALZAK - Universidad Tecnologica de Bolivar, Cartagena, Colombia, 4ALZAK, Cartagena, Colombia, 5Sociedad de Oncologia y Hematologia del Cesar, Valledupar, Colombia, 6Fundación Valle del Lili - Universidad ICESI Centro PROESA, Cali, Colombia, 7CEO Grupo Uroexpertos SAS, Medellin, Colombia, 8Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia
1Bayer, Bogota, Colombia, 2Hospital Universitario Mayor Mederi - Universidad del Rosario, Bogota, Colombia, 3ALZAK - Universidad Tecnologica de Bolivar, Cartagena, Colombia, 4ALZAK, Cartagena, Colombia, 5Sociedad de Oncologia y Hematologia del Cesar, Valledupar, Colombia, 6Fundación Valle del Lili - Universidad ICESI Centro PROESA, Cali, Colombia, 7CEO Grupo Uroexpertos SAS, Medellin, Colombia, 8Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Colombia
OBJECTIVES: To describe the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, as well as the risk profile, of a cohort of patients with prostate cancer (PC) treated at four high-complexity institutions in Colombia
METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted based on a healthcare resource utilization (HRU) algorithm to categorize patients into PC states using administrative and billing/invoicing records. The analysis included 2,028 patients aged ≥18 years with a confirmed diagnosis of PC (ICD-10: C61X) at any stage, treated between 2021 and 2024 at four centers in Bogota, Apartado, Cali, and Valledupar. Characteristics were compared between non-metastatic (nmPC) and metastatic (mPC) patients. To address the missing metastasis data, patients treated with chemotherapy plus anti-androgens and/or bone protectors were classified as metastatic. Statistical tests comparing means and proportions by metastasis state were performed at a 5% significance level
RESULTS: A total of 2,028 patients were included (mean age: 72.9 ± 9.7 years). The cohort was predominantly from Bogotá (63%), low income (69%), and affiliated with the contributory regime (71%). Clinically, 86.7% presented non-metastatic disease (86% locally advanced), while 13.2% had metastatic disease (80% hormone-sensitive). Significant therapeutic disparities were observed between nmPC and mPC. Patients with metastasis showed substantially higher utilization of chemotherapy (27% vs. 1.2%), antiandrogens (44% vs. 13%), and bisphosphonates (33% vs. 0%) (all p<0.001). Conversely, no significant differences were found regarding radical prostatectomy, external or internal radiotherapy, history of bone fractures, or referrals to neuropsychology services (all p>0.05)
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides critical real-world evidence from a developing country, characterizing a population with predominantly low socioeconomic status. While the results confirmed that mPC necessitates significantly intensified management with antiandrogens and bisphosphonates, the high prevalence of locally advanced disease underscores the urgent need for early detection initiatives to optimize both clinical prognosis and economic efficiency in resource-constrained settings
METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted based on a healthcare resource utilization (HRU) algorithm to categorize patients into PC states using administrative and billing/invoicing records. The analysis included 2,028 patients aged ≥18 years with a confirmed diagnosis of PC (ICD-10: C61X) at any stage, treated between 2021 and 2024 at four centers in Bogota, Apartado, Cali, and Valledupar. Characteristics were compared between non-metastatic (nmPC) and metastatic (mPC) patients. To address the missing metastasis data, patients treated with chemotherapy plus anti-androgens and/or bone protectors were classified as metastatic. Statistical tests comparing means and proportions by metastasis state were performed at a 5% significance level
RESULTS: A total of 2,028 patients were included (mean age: 72.9 ± 9.7 years). The cohort was predominantly from Bogotá (63%), low income (69%), and affiliated with the contributory regime (71%). Clinically, 86.7% presented non-metastatic disease (86% locally advanced), while 13.2% had metastatic disease (80% hormone-sensitive). Significant therapeutic disparities were observed between nmPC and mPC. Patients with metastasis showed substantially higher utilization of chemotherapy (27% vs. 1.2%), antiandrogens (44% vs. 13%), and bisphosphonates (33% vs. 0%) (all p<0.001). Conversely, no significant differences were found regarding radical prostatectomy, external or internal radiotherapy, history of bone fractures, or referrals to neuropsychology services (all p>0.05)
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides critical real-world evidence from a developing country, characterizing a population with predominantly low socioeconomic status. While the results confirmed that mPC necessitates significantly intensified management with antiandrogens and bisphosphonates, the high prevalence of locally advanced disease underscores the urgent need for early detection initiatives to optimize both clinical prognosis and economic efficiency in resource-constrained settings
Conference/Value in Health Info
2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6
Code
EE252
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
SDC: Oncology