Justin G Trogdon1,2, Aaron D Falchook3, Ramsankar Basak4, William R Carpenter1, Ronald C Chen2,4,5. 1. Department of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill. 2. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Cancer Institute, Memorial Healthcare System, Pembroke Pines, Florida. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill. 5. Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill.
Abstract
Importance: Localized prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment among elderly men who are not likely to benefit represents a potential source of low-value health care services. Objective: To quantify the costs to the Medicare program associated with detection and treatment of prostate cancer among elderly men in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study uses the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database to identify men 70 years or older diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2004 and 2007 and to ascertain Medicare costs associated with diagnosis and workup, treatment, follow-up, and morbidity management of the disease. National Medicare costs were estimated using per-person costs, stage-adjusted prostate cancer incidence rates by age from SEER 2007 through 2011, and 2010 Census population estimates by age. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated costs to the Medicare program overall, and in each (mutually exclusive) category related to diagnosis and workup, treatment, follow-up, and morbidity management. Results: This nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study included 49 692 men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer from the SEER-Medicare database (all participants were 70 years or older; 25 981 [52.3%] were 76 years or older). The median per-patient cost within 3 years after prostate cancer diagnosis was $14 453 (interquartile range [IQR], $4887-$27 899). The majority of this cost was attributable to treatment costs (median, $10 558; IQR, $1990-$23 718). Patients with a Gleason score of 6 or lower who pursued initial conservative management (no treatment within 12 months of diagnosis) had a 3-year median total cost of $1914 per patient. The estimated total 3-year cost to the Medicare program associated with the annual detection of prostate cancer in men 70 years or older is approximately $1.2 billion. Increasing active surveillance use in those with Gleason score of 6 or lower could reduce this cost by $320 million. Conclusions and Relevance: There is substantial cost to the Medicare program associated with the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer among elderly men in the United States, despite the fact that these men are unlikely to die of prostate cancer. The majority of costs are related to treatment. Reducing provision of low-value health care services among this patient population could result in significant health care savings.
Importance: Localized prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment among elderly men who are not likely to benefit represents a potential source of low-value health care services. Objective: To quantify the costs to the Medicare program associated with detection and treatment of prostate cancer among elderly men in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study uses the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database to identify men 70 years or older diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2004 and 2007 and to ascertain Medicare costs associated with diagnosis and workup, treatment, follow-up, and morbidity management of the disease. National Medicare costs were estimated using per-person costs, stage-adjusted prostate cancer incidence rates by age from SEER 2007 through 2011, and 2010 Census population estimates by age. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated costs to the Medicare program overall, and in each (mutually exclusive) category related to diagnosis and workup, treatment, follow-up, and morbidity management. Results: This nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study included 49 692 men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer from the SEER-Medicare database (all participants were 70 years or older; 25 981 [52.3%] were 76 years or older). The median per-patient cost within 3 years after prostate cancer diagnosis was $14 453 (interquartile range [IQR], $4887-$27 899). The majority of this cost was attributable to treatment costs (median, $10 558; IQR, $1990-$23 718). Patients with a Gleason score of 6 or lower who pursued initial conservative management (no treatment within 12 months of diagnosis) had a 3-year median total cost of $1914 per patient. The estimated total 3-year cost to the Medicare program associated with the annual detection of prostate cancer in men 70 years or older is approximately $1.2 billion. Increasing active surveillance use in those with Gleason score of 6 or lower could reduce this cost by $320 million. Conclusions and Relevance: There is substantial cost to the Medicare program associated with the diagnosis and treatment of localized prostate cancer among elderly men in the United States, despite the fact that these men are unlikely to die of prostate cancer. The majority of costs are related to treatment. Reducing provision of low-value health care services among this patient population could result in significant health care savings.
Authors: Tudor Borza; Samuel R Kaufman; Vahakn B Shahinian; Phyllis Yan; David C Miller; Ted A Skolarus; Brent K Hollenbeck Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Joseph L Dieleman; Ellen Squires; Anthony L Bui; Madeline Campbell; Abigail Chapin; Hannah Hamavid; Cody Horst; Zhiyin Li; Taylor Matyasz; Alex Reynolds; Nafis Sadat; Matthew T Schneider; Christopher J L Murray Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-11-07 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Andrew M D Wolf; Richard C Wender; Ruth B Etzioni; Ian M Thompson; Anthony V D'Amico; Robert J Volk; Durado D Brooks; Chiranjeev Dash; Idris Guessous; Kimberly Andrews; Carol DeSantis; Robert A Smith Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2010-03-03 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Florence K Tangka; Justin G Trogdon; Lisa C Richardson; David Howard; Susan A Sabatino; Eric A Finkelstein Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-07-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michel Bolla; Geertjan Van Tienhoven; Padraig Warde; Jean Bernard Dubois; René-Olivier Mirimanoff; Guy Storme; Jacques Bernier; Abraham Kuten; Cora Sternberg; Ignace Billiet; José Lopez Torecilla; Raphael Pfeffer; Carmel Lino Cutajar; Theodore Van der Kwast; Laurence Collette Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2010-10-07 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Nathan C Sheets; Gregg H Goldin; Anne-Marie Meyer; Yang Wu; YunKyung Chang; Til Stürmer; Jordan A Holmes; Bryce B Reeve; Paul A Godley; William R Carpenter; Ronald C Chen Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gerald L Andriole; E David Crawford; Robert L Grubb; Saundra S Buys; David Chia; Timothy R Church; Mona N Fouad; Edward P Gelmann; Paul A Kvale; Douglas J Reding; Joel L Weissfeld; Lance A Yokochi; Barbara O'Brien; Jonathan D Clapp; Joshua M Rathmell; Thomas L Riley; Richard B Hayes; Barnett S Kramer; Grant Izmirlian; Anthony B Miller; Paul F Pinsky; Philip C Prorok; John K Gohagan; Christine D Berg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-03-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Carrie N Klabunde; Julie M Legler; Joan L Warren; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Deborah Schrag Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2007-05-25 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Amar U Kishan; Nicholas Marco; Melanie-Birte Schulz-Jaavall; Michael L Steinberg; Phuoc T Tran; Jesus E Juarez; Audrey Dang; Donatello Telesca; Wolfgang A Lilleby; Joanne B Weidhaas Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 6.901
Authors: Kathryn R Tringale; Renee L Gennarelli; Erin F Gillespie; Aaron P Mitchell; Michael J Zelefsky Journal: Cancer Invest Date: 2021-01-08 Impact factor: 2.176
Authors: Samuel Rosas; Ryan T Hughes; Michael Farris; Hwajin Lee; Emory R McTyre; Johannes F Plate; Lihong Shi; Cynthia L Emory; A William Blackstock; Bethany A Kerr; Jeffrey S Willey Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2019-07-30
Authors: Christopher J Magnani; Nicolas Bievre; Laurence C Baker; James D Brooks; Douglas W Blayney; Tina Hernandez-Boussard Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2020-12-10
Authors: Hazem Orabi; Lauren Howard; Christopher L Amling; William J Aronson; Matthew R Cooperberg; Christopher J Kane; Martha K Terris; Zachary Klaassen; Jessica L Janes; Stephen J Freedland; Thomas J Polascik Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2022-02-10
Authors: Allan Saj Porcacchia; Gabriel Natan Pires; Valdemar Ortiz; Monica Levy Andersen; Sergio Tufik Journal: Int Braz J Urol Date: 2022 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.541