Literature DB >> 28522924

Use of the 4Kscore test to predict the risk of aggressive prostate cancer prior to prostate biopsy: Overall cost savings and improved quality of care to the us healthcare system.

Jeffrey D Voigt1, Yan Dong2, Vincent Linder2, Stephen Zappala1.   

Abstract

The 4Kscore® Test (BioReference Laboratories, Elmwood Park, NJ) is a blood test that accurately determines the risk of aggressive prostate cancer and significantly reduces prostate biopsies and associated overdiagnosis and overtreatment of indolent cancer. A budget impact model was developed to test the hypothesis that the 4Kscore Test can improve quality of care and deliver cost savings for patients who are suspected of having prostate cancer and would otherwise undergo prostate biopsy under the current standard of care (SOC) in the United States. The direct costs (diagnosis plus treatment) utilized in the model are based on Medicare payment data and were calculated over a 1-year time horizon. The model compares SOC, in which all patients have prostate biopsy, to a "4Kscore strategy," in which the 4Kscore Test is used to guide the decision to biopsy the prostate. A set of one-way sensitivity analyses was conducted to examine the robustness of the findings. Savings of more than $169 million (15.6% of total SOC costs) were realized in the 4Kscore strategy versus SOC ($917 M versus $1,086 M, respectively) in a cohort of 100,000 patients. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the findings are robust. Most cost savings for the 4Kscore strategy were realized in patients who, when managed by SOC, are found to have no prostate cancer or Gleason score 6 pathology. The patients with Gleason score 6 exhibited the greatest benefits from the 4Kscore strategy, avoiding both an unnecessary prostate biopsy and subsequent overtreatment. The 4Kscore Test was shown to significantly reduce costs to the healthcare system while improving patients' quality of care. Providers and their patients suspected of having prostate cancer should consider using the 4Kscore Test prior to proceeding with prostate biopsy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  4Kscore Test; Cost savings; PSA screening; Prostate biopsy; Prostate cancer

Year:  2017        PMID: 28522924      PMCID: PMC5434830          DOI: 10.3909/riu0753

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Urol        ISSN: 1523-6161


  22 in total

1.  NCCN Guidelines Insights: Prostate Cancer Early Detection, Version 2.2016.

Authors:  Peter R Carroll; J Kellogg Parsons; Gerald Andriole; Robert R Bahnson; Erik P Castle; William J Catalona; Douglas M Dahl; John W Davis; Jonathan I Epstein; Ruth B Etzioni; Thomas Farrington; George P Hemstreet; Mark H Kawachi; Simon Kim; Paul H Lange; Kevin R Loughlin; William Lowrance; Paul Maroni; James Mohler; Todd M Morgan; Kelvin A Moses; Robert B Nadler; Michael Poch; Chuck Scales; Terrence M Shaneyfelt; Marc C Smaldone; Geoffrey Sonn; Preston Sprenkle; Andrew J Vickers; Robert Wake; Dorothy A Shead; Deborah A Freedman-Cass
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 11.908

2.  Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors:  Virginia A Moyer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-07-17       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Primary treatments for clinically localised prostate cancer: a comprehensive lifetime cost-utility analysis.

Authors:  Matthew R Cooperberg; Naren R Ramakrishna; Steven B Duff; Kathleen E Hughes; Sara Sadownik; Joseph A Smith; Ashutosh K Tewari
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Robert K Nam; Refik Saskin; Yuna Lee; Ying Liu; Calvin Law; Laurence H Klotz; D Andrew Loblaw; John Trachtenberg; Aleksandra Stanimirovic; Andrew E Simor; Arun Seth; David R Urbach; Steven A Narod
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  A multi-institutional prospective trial in the USA confirms that the 4Kscore accurately identifies men with high-grade prostate cancer.

Authors:  Dipen J Parekh; Sanoj Punnen; Daniel D Sjoberg; Scott W Asroff; James L Bailen; James S Cochran; Raoul Concepcion; Richard D David; Kenneth B Deck; Igor Dumbadze; Michael Gambla; Michael S Grable; Ralph J Henderson; Lawrence Karsh; Evan B Krisch; Timothy D Langford; Daniel W Lin; Shawn M McGee; John J Munoz; Christopher M Pieczonka; Kimberley Rieger-Christ; Daniel R Saltzstein; John W Scott; Neal D Shore; Paul R Sieber; Todd M Waldmann; Fredrick N Wolk; Stephen M Zappala
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-10-27       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  National Trends in Prostate Biopsy and Radical Prostatectomy Volumes Following the US Preventive Services Task Force Guidelines Against Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening.

Authors:  Joshua A Halpern; Jonathan E Shoag; Amanda S Artis; Karla V Ballman; Art Sedrakyan; Dawn L Hershman; Jason D Wright; Ya Chen Tina Shih; Jim C Hu
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 14.766

7.  Budget impact model: epigenetic assay can help avoid unnecessary repeated prostate biopsies and reduce healthcare spending.

Authors:  Wade Aubry; Robert Lieberthal; Arnold Willis; Grant Bagley; Simon M Willis; Andrew Layton
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2013-01

Review 8.  The Kallikrein Panel for prostate cancer screening: its economic impact.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Voigt; Stephen M Zappala; E Darracott Vaughan; Alan J Wein
Journal:  Prostate       Date:  2013-10-26       Impact factor: 4.104

9.  Predicting high-grade cancer at ten-core prostate biopsy using four kallikrein markers measured in blood in the ProtecT study.

Authors:  Richard J Bryant; Daniel D Sjoberg; Andrew J Vickers; Mary C Robinson; Rajeev Kumar; Luke Marsden; Michael Davis; Peter T Scardino; Jenny Donovan; David E Neal; Hans Lilja; Freddie C Hamdy
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-04-11       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Setting a research agenda for medical overuse.

Authors:  Daniel J Morgan; Shannon Brownlee; Aaron L Leppin; Nancy Kressin; Sanket S Dhruva; Les Levin; Bruce E Landon; Mark A Zezza; Harald Schmidt; Vikas Saini; Adam G Elshaug
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2015-08-25
View more
  6 in total

1.  Clinical performance of the 4Kscore Test to predict high-grade prostate cancer at biopsy: A meta-analysis of us and European clinical validation study results.

Authors:  Stephen M Zappala; Peter T Scardino; David Okrongly; Vincent Linder; Yan Dong
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2017

2.  Assessment of men's risk thresholds to proceed with prostate biopsy for the early detection of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Kevin Koo; Elias S Hyams
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 3.  Modern biomarkers in prostate cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Paweł Porzycki; Ewa Ciszkowicz
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2020-08-07

4.  The cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening using the Stockholm3 test.

Authors:  Andreas A Karlsson; Shuang Hao; Alexandra Jauhiainen; K Miriam Elfström; Lars Egevad; Tobias Nordström; Emelie Heintz; Mark S Clements
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Blood and urine biomarkers in prostate cancer: Are we ready for reflex testing in men with an elevated prostate-specific antigen?

Authors:  Edward K Chang; Adam J Gadzinski; Yaw A Nyame
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2021-06-23

Review 6.  Health Economic Evidence for Liquid- and Tissue-based Molecular Tests that Inform Decisions on Prostate Biopsies and Treatment of Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Koen Degeling; Amanda Pereira-Salgado; Niall M Corcoran; Paul C Boutros; Peter Kuhn; Maarten J IJzerman
Journal:  Eur Urol Open Sci       Date:  2021-03-26
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.