Hala T Borno1, Tracy Kuo Lin2, Anobel Y Odisho3,4, Arpita Desai1, Vadim Koshkin1, Kalin Werner5, Nichole Legaspi1, Matthew Bucknor6, Alexander Bell7, Sylvia Zhang1, Thomas A Hope6. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 2. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Institute for Health & Aging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 3. Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 4. Center for Digital Health Innovation, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA. 5. Division of Emergency Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. 6. Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 7. School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular imaging with novel radiotracers is changing the treatment landscape in prostate cancer (PCa). Currently, standard of care includes either conventional and molecular imaging at time of biochemical recurrence (BCR). This study evaluated the determinants of and cost associated with utilization of molecular imaging for BCR PCa. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study among men with BCR PCa from June 2018 to May 2019. Multivariate logistic regression models were employed to analyze the primary outcome: receipt of molecular imaging (e.g. Fluciclovine PET and Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen PET) as part of diagnostic work-up for BCR PCa. Multivariate linear regression models were used to analyze the secondary outcome: overall healthcare cost within a 1-year time frame. RESULTS: The study sample included 234 patients; 79.1% White, 2.1% Black, 8.5% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 10.3% Other. The majority were 55 years or older (97.9%) and publicly insured (74.8%). Analysis indicated a one-unit reduction in PSA is associated with 1.3 times higher likelihood of receiving molecular imaging (p < 0.01). Analysis found that privately insured patients were associated with approximately $500,000 more in hospital reimbursement (p < 0.01) as compared to the publicly insured. Additionally, a one-unit increase in PSA is associated with $6254 increase in hospital reimbursement or an increase in total payments by 2.1% (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Higher PSA was associated with lower likelihood for molecular imaging and higher cost in a one-year time frame. Higher cost was also associated with private insurance, but there was no clear relationship between insurance type and imaging type.
BACKGROUND: Molecular imaging with novel radiotracers is changing the treatment landscape in prostate cancer (PCa). Currently, standard of care includes either conventional and molecular imaging at time of biochemical recurrence (BCR). This study evaluated the determinants of and cost associated with utilization of molecular imaging for BCR PCa. METHODS: This is a retrospective observational cohort study among men with BCR PCa from June 2018 to May 2019. Multivariate logistic regression models were employed to analyze the primary outcome: receipt of molecular imaging (e.g. Fluciclovine PET and Prostate Specific Membrane Antigen PET) as part of diagnostic work-up for BCR PCa. Multivariate linear regression models were used to analyze the secondary outcome: overall healthcare cost within a 1-year time frame. RESULTS: The study sample included 234 patients; 79.1% White, 2.1% Black, 8.5% Asian/Pacific Islander, and 10.3% Other. The majority were 55 years or older (97.9%) and publicly insured (74.8%). Analysis indicated a one-unit reduction in PSA is associated with 1.3 times higher likelihood of receiving molecular imaging (p < 0.01). Analysis found that privately insured patients were associated with approximately $500,000 more in hospital reimbursement (p < 0.01) as compared to the publicly insured. Additionally, a one-unit increase in PSA is associated with $6254 increase in hospital reimbursement or an increase in total payments by 2.1% (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Higher PSA was associated with lower likelihood for molecular imaging and higher cost in a one-year time frame. Higher cost was also associated with private insurance, but there was no clear relationship between insurance type and imaging type.
Authors: P C Albertsen; J A Hanley; L C Harlan; F D Gilliland; A Hamilton; J M Liff; J L Stanford; R A Stephenson Journal: J Urol Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Thomas A Hope; Rahul Aggarwal; Bryant Chee; Dora Tao; Kirsten L Greene; Matthew R Cooperberg; Felix Feng; Albert Chang; Charles J Ryan; Eric J Small; Peter R Carroll Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: S P Porten; A Smith; A Y Odisho; M S Litwin; C S Saigal; P R Carroll; M R Cooperberg Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2014-05-13 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Samuel J Galgano; Carli E Calderone; Andrew M McDonald; Jeffrey W Nix; Mollie deShazo; Eddy S Yang; Jonathan E McConathy; Soroush Rais-Bahrami Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2018-11-14 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: Jeremie Calais; Francesco Ceci; Matthias Eiber; Thomas A Hope; Michael S Hofman; Christoph Rischpler; Tore Bach-Gansmo; Cristina Nanni; Bital Savir-Baruch; David Elashoff; Tristan Grogan; Magnus Dahlbom; Roger Slavik; Jeannine Gartmann; Kathleen Nguyen; Vincent Lok; Hossein Jadvar; Amar U Kishan; Matthew B Rettig; Robert E Reiter; Wolfgang P Fendler; Johannes Czernin Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 41.316