OBJECTIVE: The cost of radical prostatectomy (RP) compared to watchful waiting (WW) has never been estimated in a randomized trial. The goal of this study was to estimate long-term total costs per patient associated with RP and WW arising from inpatient and outpatient hospital care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This investigation used the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) trial, comparing RP to WW, and included data from 212 participants living in two counties in Sweden from 1989 to 1999 (105 randomized to WW and 107 to RP). All costs were included from randomization date until death or end of follow-up in July 2007. Resource use arising from inpatient and outpatient hospital costs was measured in physical units and multiplied by a unit cost to come up with a total cost per patient. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 12 years, the overall cost in the RP group was 34% higher (p < 0.01) than in the WW group, corresponding to €6123 in Sweden. The difference was driven almost exclusively by the cost of the surgical procedure. The cost difference between RP and WW was two times higher among men with low (2-6) than among those with high (7-10) Gleason score. CONCLUSION: In this economic evaluation of RP versus WW of localized prostate cancer in a randomized study, RP was associated with 34% higher costs. This difference, attributed exclusively to the cost of the RP procedure, was not overcome during extended follow-up.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The cost of radical prostatectomy (RP) compared to watchful waiting (WW) has never been estimated in a randomized trial. The goal of this study was to estimate long-term total costs per patient associated with RP and WW arising from inpatient and outpatient hospital care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This investigation used the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group Study Number 4 (SPCG-4) trial, comparing RP to WW, and included data from 212 participants living in two counties in Sweden from 1989 to 1999 (105 randomized to WW and 107 to RP). All costs were included from randomization date until death or end of follow-up in July 2007. Resource use arising from inpatient and outpatient hospital costs was measured in physical units and multiplied by a unit cost to come up with a total cost per patient. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 12 years, the overall cost in the RP group was 34% higher (p < 0.01) than in the WW group, corresponding to €6123 in Sweden. The difference was driven almost exclusively by the cost of the surgical procedure. The cost difference between RP and WW was two times higher among men with low (2-6) than among those with high (7-10) Gleason score. CONCLUSION: In this economic evaluation of RP versus WW of localized prostate cancer in a randomized study, RP was associated with 34% higher costs. This difference, attributed exclusively to the cost of the RP procedure, was not overcome during extended follow-up.
Authors: Robin Wm Vernooij; Michelle Lancee; Anne Cleves; Philipp Dahm; Chris H Bangma; Katja Kh Aben Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-06-04
Authors: Lars Holmberg; Anna Bill-Axelson; Gunnar Steineck; Hans Garmo; Juni Palmgren; Eva Johansson; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2012-12
Authors: Tengbin Xiong; Rebecca M Turner; Yinghui Wei; David E Neal; Georgios Lyratzopoulos; Julian P T Higgins Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-05-15 Impact factor: 2.692