Literature DB >> 17224778

Trends in treatment costs for localized prostate cancer: the healthy screenee effect.

Steven B Zeliadt1, Ruth Etzioni, Scott D Ramsey, David F Penson, Arnold L Potosky.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We sought to obtain estimates of trends in initial treatment costs during the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) era that account for the changing patient case-mix associated with screening.
SUBJECTS: We used reimbursement claims for Medicare-eligible subjects diagnosed with nonmetastatic prostate cancer between 1991 and 1999. Patients were grouped by initial treatment, with 17,846 receiving radical prostatectomy (RP), 25,933 receiving external beam radiotherapy (XRT), and 4525 receiving brachytherapy (BT).
METHODS: Cancer-attributable costs were computed by subtracting noncancer costs from total Medicare reimbursements among newly diagnosed cancer patients. Noncancer costs were estimated in 2 ways: (1) average costs among age-matched, cancer-free control subjects (control method) and (2) projections based on claims from subjects before diagnosis (prediagnosis method). Adjusted annual percent change in cancer-attributable costs was calculated using multivariate generalized linear models.
RESULTS: Noncancer costs increased at a much lower rate among men prior to diagnosis (3.8% annually) than among the general Medicare population (10.9%). The 2 approaches yielded different results; RP costs declined by 2.4% annually (prediagnosis method) versus 6.2% (control method); XRT costs declined by 1.5% versus 5.8%; and BT costs declined by 4.1% versus 8.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of self-selection of PSA screening, men diagnosed with prostate cancer today are now healthier overall than men in the general population and are considerably healthier than men diagnosed previously. Estimates of cancer-attributable costs that do not account for this healthy selection effect are likely to be biased. Declines in cancer-attributable treatment costs are evident even after accounting for a healthy screenee effect, suggesting that there has been a real reduction in cancer treatment costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17224778     DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000241044.09778.3f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  14 in total

1.  Effectiveness of primary androgen-deprivation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Arnold L Potosky; Reina Haque; Andrea E Cassidy-Bushrow; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Miao Jiang; Huei-Ting Tsai; George Luta; Nancy L Keating; Matthew R Smith; Stephen K Van Den Eeden
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 2.  A review of rectal toxicity following permanent low dose-rate prostate brachytherapy and the potential value of biodegradable rectal spacers.

Authors:  M E Schutzer; P F Orio; M C Biagioli; D A Asher; H Lomas; D Moghanaki
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2015-02-17       Impact factor: 5.554

3.  Treatment trends and Medicare reimbursements for localized prostate cancer in elderly patients.

Authors:  Paolo Dell'oglio; Anne Sophie Valiquette; Sami-Ramzi Leyh-Bannurah; Zhe Tian; Vincent Trudeau; Alessandro Larcher; Shahrokh F Shariat; Umberto Capitanio; Alberto Briganti; Markus Graefen; Francesco Montorsi; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 1.862

4.  Cost implications of the rapid adoption of newer technologies for treating prostate cancer.

Authors:  Paul L Nguyen; Xiangmei Gu; Stuart R Lipsitz; Toni K Choueiri; Wesley W Choi; Yin Lei; Karen E Hoffman; Jim C Hu
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-03-14       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Overdetection of recurrence after radical prostatectomy: estimates based on patient and tumor characteristics.

Authors:  Jing Xia; Bruce J Trock; Roman Gulati; Leslie Mallinger; Matthew R Cooperberg; Peter R Carroll; H Ballentine Carter; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 12.531

6.  Resource Use in the Last Year of Life Among Patients Who Died With Versus of Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Michaela A Dinan; Yanhong Li; Yinghong Zhang; Suzanne B Stewart; Lesley H Curtis; Daniel J George; Shelby D Reed
Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer       Date:  2015-08-06       Impact factor: 2.872

Review 7.  Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA)-Based Population Screening for Prostate Cancer: An Economic Analysis.

Authors:  A Tawfik
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2015-05-01

8.  Prioritizing comparative effectiveness research for cancer diagnostics using a regional stakeholder approach.

Authors:  Gregory Klein; Laura S Gold; Sean D Sullivan; Diana S M Buist; Scott Ramsey; Karma Kreizenbeck; Kyle Snell; Elizabeth Trice Loggers; Joseph Gifford; John B Watkins; Larry Kessler
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 1.744

9.  Clinical and pathological characteristics of screen-detected versus clinically diagnosed prostate cancer in Nanjing, China.

Authors:  LiXin Hua; Di Qiao; Bin Xu; NingHan Feng; Gong Cheng; JieXiu Zhang; NingHong Song; Wei Zhang; Jie Yang; JianGang Chen; YuanGeng Sui; HongFei Wu
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2010-01-14       Impact factor: 3.064

10.  Quality of life three years after diagnosis of localised prostate cancer: population based cohort study.

Authors:  David P Smith; Madeleine T King; Sam Egger; Martin P Berry; Phillip D Stricker; Paul Cozzi; Jeanette Ward; Dianne L O'Connell; Bruce K Armstrong
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-11-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.