Comparison of the medical costs between active surveillance and other treatments for early prostate cancer in Japan using data from the PRIAS-JAPAN study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the medical costs of active surveillance with those of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy, brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy, and hormone therapy for low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: The costs of protocol biopsies performed in the first year of surveillance (between January 2010 and June 2020) and those of brachytherapy and radiation therapy performed between May 2019 and June 2020 at the Kagawa University Hospital were analyzed. Hormone therapy costs were assumed to be the costs of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone analogs for over 5 years. Active surveillance-eligible patients were defined based on the following: age <74 years, ≤T2, Gleason score ≤6, prostate-specific antigen level ≤10 ng/ml, and 1-2 positive cores. We estimated the total number of active surveillance-eligible patients in Japan based on the Japan Study Group of Prostate Cancer (J-CAP) study and the 2017 cancer statistical data. We then calculated the 5-year treatment costs of active surveillance-eligible patients using the J-CAP and PRIAS-JAPAN study data. RESULTS: In 2017, number of active surveillance-eligible patients in Japan was estimated to be 2808. The 5-year total costs of surveillance, prostatectomy, brachytherapy, radiation therapy, and hormone therapy were 1.65, 14.0, 4.61, 4.04, and 5.87 million United States dollar (USD), respectively. If 50% and 100% of the patients in each treatment group had opted for active surveillance as the initial treatment, the total treatment cost would have been reduced by USD 6.89 million (JPY 889 million) and USD 13.8 million (JPY 1.78 billion), respectively. CONCLUSION: Expanding active surveillance to eligible patients with prostate cancer helps save medical costs.

Current status of systemic chemotherapy for octogenarians with advanced urothelial cancer in Japan: a Japanese multi-institutional study (CURE study).

BACKGROUND: The standard regimen of systemic chemotherapy for patients with advanced urothelial cancer (UC) changed from methotrexate, vinblastine, adriamycin, and cisplatin (MVAC) to gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) in 2008 when the use of gemcitabine for UC began to be reimbursed by public health insurance in Japan. We examined its influence on the chemotherapy trend in elderly patients aged ≥80 years. METHODS: Among 345 patients included in our previous multicenter retrospective cohort study (chemotherapy for urothelial carcinoma: renal function and efficacy study; CURE study), the outcome of 30 patients aged ≥80 years was reviewed before and after 2008 and compared with 315 young patients. RESULTS: There were only 7 (4.6 %) elderly individuals among all registered patients before 2008, whereas the number increased to 23 (12 %) after 2008. Before 2008, only one elderly patient received MVAC, while GC (whose rate was similar to the rate in young patients) was administered to 13 patients (56.5 %) after 2008. The chemotherapeutic effect and overall survival (OS) rate was not significantly different between young and elderly patients. In the elderly treated with the GC regimen, the renal impairment rate after the first cycle was significantly higher, and the presence of distant metastases and renal impairment were independent prognostic factors in a multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Since GC was approved as the standard regimen for first-line chemotherapy in UC, selected elderly patients have been able to safely receive systemic chemotherapy like young patients. The clinical response rate and OS rate were similar to the young, but we need to monitor changes in renal function more closely in the elderly treated with GC.

[Assessment of the urinary status by self-administered questionnaires in men after radical prostatectomy-- comparison with the urination status of elderly women].

The lower urinary tract anatomy in men after radical prostatectomy (RP) resembles that in women. Out of 112 male patients who had undergone RP for localized prostate cancer, 102 (91%) of them responded to a questionnaire survey. The mean age of the responders at the time of RP was 65.9 +/- 5.3 years. The time of response after RP ranged from 2 months to 6 years (median: 44 months). The instruments used for the assessment of urinary status were the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and QOL score, the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) and Overactive Bladder Symptom Score (OABSS). Urinary status of 40 elderly female patients aged 59.5 +/- 6.9 years who consulted our outpatient clinic due to conditions (microhematuria, simple renal cyst, etc.) unrelated to lower urinary tract disorders were assessed with the IPSS. In the male patients, total IPSS and QOL score showed significant improvement over time after RP (P = 0.0004, P = 0.0015, respectively). In particular, the voiding symptom score of IPSS showed significant improvement (P < 0.0001). The improvement of incontinence within 1 year after RP was confirmed with ICIQ-SF (p = 0.06). In contrast, the storage symptom score of IPSS after RP was not different with time after RP. Furthermore, the OABSS rose with time after RP (p = 0.08). On the other hand, in the elderly female controls, the storage symptom score of IPSS was significantly higher than voiding symptom score (P = 0.0019). Men who underwent RP showed significant improvement in their voiding symptoms and continence status, but the storage symptoms, progressively worsened following RP. Consequently, careful follow-up and appropriate medical intervention are needed in men after RP as in aging women.

Health-related quality of life in Japanese men with localized prostate cancer: assessment with the SF-8.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate health related quality of life (HRQOL) using the Medical Outcomes Study 8-items Short Form Health Survey (SF-8) questionnaire in Japanese patients with early prostate cancer. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was done in 457 patients with prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy, external beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, androgen deprivation therapy, and watchful waiting or a combination these therapies. General HRQOL was measured using the Japanese version of the SF-8 questionnaire and disease-specific HRQOL was assessed using the Japanese version of the Extended Prostate Cancer Index Composite. RESULTS: The external beam radiotherapy group reported significantly lower values for the physical health component summary score (PCS) in comparison to the radical prostatectomy and brachytherapy groups (P < 0.05). In the analysis of both the PCS and the mental health component summary score (MCS) over time after treatment, higher scores with time were found in the radical prostatectomy group. No significant change over time after androgen deprivation therapy in the PCS was found. In contrast, the MCS was found to deteriorate in the early period, showing a significant increase over time. CONCLUSIONS: SF-8 in combination with the Extended Prostate Cancer Index Composite has shown to be a helpful tool in the HRQOL assessment of Japanese patients treated for localized prostate cancer.