Literature DB >> 30127462

Cost-effectiveness of SelectMDx for prostate cancer in four European countries: a comparative modeling study.

Tim M Govers1, Daphne Hessels2, Virginie Vlaeminck-Guillem3,4, Bernd J Schmitz-Dräger5, Christian G Stief6, Claudio Martinez-Ballesteros7, Matteo Ferro8, Angel Borque-Fernando9, Jose Rubio-Briones10, J P Michiel Sedelaar11, Wim van Criekinge12, Jack A Schalken11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Low specificity of prostate-specific antigen results in a considerable number of unnecessary prostate biopsies in current practice. SelectMDx® predicts significant prostate cancer upon biopsy and is used to reduce the number of unnecessary initial prostate biopsies. Furthermore, potential overtreatment of insignificant prostate cancer can be reduced. Besides the diagnostic accuracy of the test, also the context in a specific country determines the potential health benefit and cost-effectiveness. Therefore, the health benefit and cost-effectiveness of SelectMDx were assessed in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain. SUBJECT AND METHODS: A decision model was used to compare the current standard of care in which men undergo initial prostate biopsy in case of an elevated prostate-specific antigen, to a strategy in which SelectMDx was used to select men for biopsy. Model inputs most relevant to each of the four countries were obtained. With use of the model long-term quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and healthcare costs were calculated for both strategies.
RESULTS: In all four countries, the SelectMDx resulted in QALY gain and cost savings compared with the current standard of care. In France, SelectMDx resulted in 0.022 QALYs gained and cost savings of €1217 per patient. For Germany, the model showed a QALY gain of 0.016 and a cost saving of €442. In Italy, the QALY gain and cost savings were 0.031 and €762. In Spain 0.020 QALYs were gained and €250 costs were saved.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of the model showed that with SelectMDx, QALYs could be gained while saving healthcare costs in the initial diagnosis of prostate cancer. The significant presence of overtreatment in the current standard of care in all four countries was the main factor that resulted in the beneficial outcomes with SelectMDx.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30127462     DOI: 10.1038/s41391-018-0076-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis        ISSN: 1365-7852            Impact factor:   5.554


  20 in total

Review 1.  All change in the prostate cancer diagnostic pathway.

Authors:  Derek J Lomas; Hashim U Ahmed
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 66.675

2.  Multiparametric MRI Versus SelectMDx Accuracy in the Diagnosis of Clinically Significant PCa in Men Enrolled in Active Surveillance.

Authors:  Pietro Pepe; Giuseppe Dibenedetto; Ludovica Pepe; Michele Pennisi
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2020 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

Review 3.  When Tissue is an Issue the Liquid Biopsy is Nonissue: A Review.

Authors:  July Rodríguez; Jenny Avila; Christian Rolfo; Alejandro Ruíz-Patiño; Alessandro Russo; Luisa Ricaurte; Camila Ordóñez-Reyes; Oscar Arrieta; Zyanya Lucia Zatarain-Barrón; Gonzalo Recondo; Andrés F Cardona
Journal:  Oncol Ther       Date:  2021-03-10

4.  Prospective assessment of two-gene urinary test with multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate for men undergoing primary prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Gian Maria Busetto; Francesco Del Giudice; Martina Maggi; Ferdinando De Marco; Angelo Porreca; Isabella Sperduti; Fabio Massimo Magliocca; Stefano Salciccia; Benjamin I Chung; Ettore De Berardinis; Alessandro Sciarra
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  A prospective randomized trial of povidone-iodine suppository before transrectal ultrasonography-guided prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Hoyoung Ryu; Sang Hun Song; Sang Eun Lee; Kyoung-Ho Song; Sangchul Lee
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.889

6.  SelectMDx and Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Prostate for Men Undergoing Primary Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective Assessment in a Multi-Institutional Study.

Authors:  Martina Maggi; Francesco Del Giudice; Ugo G Falagario; Andrea Cocci; Giorgio Ivan Russo; Marina Di Mauro; Giuseppe Salvatore Sepe; Fabio Galasso; Rosario Leonardi; Gabriele Iacona; Peter R Carroll; Matthew R Cooperberg; Angelo Porreca; Matteo Ferro; Giuseppe Lucarelli; Daniela Terracciano; Luigi Cormio; Giuseppe Carrieri; Ettore De Berardinis; Alessandro Sciarra; Gian Maria Busetto
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-04-23       Impact factor: 6.639

Review 7.  Active Surveillance in Prostate Cancer: Role of Available Biomarkers in Daily Practice.

Authors:  Belén Pastor-Navarro; José Rubio-Briones; Ángel Borque-Fernando; Luis M Esteban; Jose Luis Dominguez-Escrig; José Antonio López-Guerrero
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  The Urinary Transcriptome as a Source of Biomarkers for Prostate Cancer.

Authors:  Carla Solé; Ibai Goicoechea; Alai Goñi; Maike Schramm; María Armesto; María Arestin; Lorea Manterola; Maitena Tellaetxe; Aitor Alberdi; Leonor Nogueira; Mathieu Roumiguie; Jose Ignacio López; Juan Pablo Sanz Jaka; Ander Urruticoechea; Itziar Vergara; Ana Loizaga-Iriarte; Miguel Unda; Arkaitz Carracedo; Bernard Malavaud; Charles H Lawrie
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-22       Impact factor: 6.639

9.  Clinically significant Prostate Cancer diagnosed using a urinary molecular biomarker-based risk score: two case reports.

Authors:  Pieter Minnee; Daphne Hessels; Jack A Schalken; Wim Van Criekinge
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2019-11-29       Impact factor: 2.264

Review 10.  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
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.