OBJECTIVES: Cost-of-illness (COI) studies estimate the overall economic burden of a specific disease, rather than simply treatment-related costs. While having been criticized for not allowing resource prioritization, COI studies can provide useful guidance, so long as they adhere to accepted methodology. Prostate cancer is an important disease in terms of economic implications because of its increasing incidence and health-care costs and therefore provides a relevant example with which to review COI study methodologies. The aim of this study was to review published COI studies on prostate cancer to analyze the methods used. METHODS: First, we provide a general description of the COI method. COI studies relating to prostate cancer were then systematically reviewed, focussing on an analysis of the different methods used. RESULTS: The methods, data sources, and estimated cost categories in each study varied widely. The review showed that COI studies adopted significantly different approaches to estimate the costs of prostate cancer, reflecting a lack of consensus on the methodology of COI studies in this area. CONCLUSION: To increase its credibility, closer agreement among researchers on the methodological principles of the COI studies would be desirable.
OBJECTIVES: Cost-of-illness (COI) studies estimate the overall economic burden of a specific disease, rather than simply treatment-related costs. While having been criticized for not allowing resource prioritization, COI studies can provide useful guidance, so long as they adhere to accepted methodology. Prostate cancer is an important disease in terms of economic implications because of its increasing incidence and health-care costs and therefore provides a relevant example with which to review COI study methodologies. The aim of this study was to review published COI studies on prostate cancer to analyze the methods used. METHODS: First, we provide a general description of the COI method. COI studies relating to prostate cancer were then systematically reviewed, focussing on an analysis of the different methods used. RESULTS: The methods, data sources, and estimated cost categories in each study varied widely. The review showed that COI studies adopted significantly different approaches to estimate the costs of prostate cancer, reflecting a lack of consensus on the methodology of COI studies in this area. CONCLUSION: To increase its credibility, closer agreement among researchers on the methodological principles of the COI studies would be desirable.
Authors: Nagede Costa; Helene Derumeaux; Thomas Rapp; Valérie Garnault; Laura Ferlicoq; Sophie Gillette; Sandrine Andrieu; Bruno Vellas; Michel Lamure; Alain Grand; Laurent Molinier Journal: Health Econ Rev Date: 2012-09-11