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.
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 cancerpatients. 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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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