Nikhil G Thaker1, Thomas J Pugh2, Usama Mahmood2, Seungtaek Choi2, Tracy E Spinks3, Neil E Martin4, Terence T Sio5, Rajat J Kudchadker6, Robert S Kaplan7, Deborah A Kuban2, David A Swanson8, Peter F Orio9, Michael J Zelefsky10, Brett W Cox11, Louis Potters11, Thomas A Buchholz2, Thomas W Feeley12, Steven J Frank13. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; The Institute for Cancer Care Innovation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 3. Office of the SVP/Hospitals & Clinics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ. 6. Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 7. Harvard Business School, Boston, MA. 8. Department of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Centers, Boston, MA. 10. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 11. Department of Radiation Oncology, North Shore-LIJ Health System, New York, NY. 12. The Institute for Cancer Care Innovation, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX; Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 13. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. Electronic address: sjfrank@mdanderson.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Value, defined as outcomes over costs, has been proposed as a measure to evaluate prostate cancer (PCa) treatments. We analyzed standardized outcomes and time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for prostate brachytherapy (PBT) to define a value framework. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with low-risk PCa treated with low-dose-rate PBT between 1998 and 2009 were included. Outcomes were recorded according to the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement standard set, which includes acute toxicity, patient-reported outcomes, and recurrence and survival outcomes. Patient-level costs to 1 year after PBT were collected using TDABC. Process mapping and radar chart analyses were conducted to visualize this value framework. RESULTS: A total of 238 men were eligible for analysis. Median age was 64 (range, 46-81). Median followup was 5 years (0.5-12.1). There were no acute Grade 3-5 complications. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 50 scores were favorable, with no clinically significant changes from baseline to last followup at 48 months for urinary incontinence/bother, bowel bother, sexual function, and vitality. Ten-year outcomes were favorable, including biochemical failure-free survival of 84.1%, metastasis-free survival 99.6%, PCa-specific survival 100%, and overall survival 88.6%. TDABC analysis demonstrated low resource utilization for PBT, with 41% and 10% of costs occurring in the operating room and with the MRI scan, respectively. The radar chart allowed direct visualization of outcomes and costs. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully created a visual framework to define the value of PBT using the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement standard set and TDABC costs. PBT is associated with excellent outcomes and low costs. Widespread adoption of this methodology will enable value comparisons across providers, institutions, and treatment modalities.
PURPOSE: Value, defined as outcomes over costs, has been proposed as a measure to evaluate prostate cancer (PCa) treatments. We analyzed standardized outcomes and time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for prostate brachytherapy (PBT) to define a value framework. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with low-risk PCa treated with low-dose-rate PBT between 1998 and 2009 were included. Outcomes were recorded according to the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement standard set, which includes acute toxicity, patient-reported outcomes, and recurrence and survival outcomes. Patient-level costs to 1 year after PBT were collected using TDABC. Process mapping and radar chart analyses were conducted to visualize this value framework. RESULTS: A total of 238 men were eligible for analysis. Median age was 64 (range, 46-81). Median followup was 5 years (0.5-12.1). There were no acute Grade 3-5 complications. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 50 scores were favorable, with no clinically significant changes from baseline to last followup at 48 months for urinary incontinence/bother, bowel bother, sexual function, and vitality. Ten-year outcomes were favorable, including biochemical failure-free survival of 84.1%, metastasis-free survival 99.6%, PCa-specific survival 100%, and overall survival 88.6%. TDABC analysis demonstrated low resource utilization for PBT, with 41% and 10% of costs occurring in the operating room and with the MRI scan, respectively. The radar chart allowed direct visualization of outcomes and costs. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully created a visual framework to define the value of PBT using the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement standard set and TDABC costs. PBT is associated with excellent outcomes and low costs. Widespread adoption of this methodology will enable value comparisons across providers, institutions, and treatment modalities.
Authors: Nancy McLaughlin; Michael A Burke; Nisheeta P Setlur; Douglas R Niedzwiecki; Alan L Kaplan; Christopher Saigal; Aman Mahajan; Neil A Martin; Robert S Kaplan Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Usama Mahmood; Thomas Pugh; Steven Frank; Lawrence Levy; Gary Walker; Waqar Haque; Matthew Koshy; William Graber; David Swanson; Karen Hoffman; Deborah Kuban; Andrew Lee Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2013-09-17 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Colin B Begg; Elyn R Riedel; Peter B Bach; Michael W Kattan; Deborah Schrag; Joan L Warren; Peter T Scardino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-04-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rajat J Kudchadker; Thomas J Pugh; David A Swanson; Teresa L Bruno; Yasemin Bolukbasi; Steven J Frank Journal: Med Dosim Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 1.482
Authors: Dylan Isaacson; Tessnim Ahmad; Ian Metzler; David T Tzou; Kazumi Taguchi; Manint Usawachintachit; Samuel Zetumer; Benjamin Sherer; Marshall Stoller; Thomas Chi Journal: J Endourol Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 2.942
Authors: Raymond B Mailhot Vega; David Barbee; Wesley Talcott; Tamara Duckworth; Bhartesh A Shah; Omar F Ishaq; Christina Small; Anamaria R Yeung; Carmen A Perez; Peter B Schiff; Ophira Ginsburg; William Small; May Abdel-Wahab; Gustavo Sarria Bardales; Matthew Harkenrider Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2018-12-28