Cost-effectiveness of MRI targeted biopsy strategies for diagnosing prostate cancer in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of six diagnostic strategies involving magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) targeted biopsy for diagnosing prostate cancer in initial and repeat biopsy settings from the Singapore healthcare system perspective. METHODS: A combined decision tree and Markov model was developed. The starting model population was men with mean age of 65 years referred for a first prostate biopsy due to clinical suspicion of prostate cancer. The six diagnostic strategies were selected for their relevance to local clinical practice. They comprised MRI targeted biopsy following a positive pre-biopsy multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) [Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score ≥ 3], systematic biopsy, or saturation biopsy employed in different testing combinations and sequences. Deterministic base case analyses with sensitivity analyses were performed using costs from the healthcare system perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained as the outcome measure to yield incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: Deterministic base case analyses showed that Strategy 1 (MRI targeted biopsy alone), Strategy 2 (MRI targeted biopsy ➔ systematic biopsy), and Strategy 4 (MRI targeted biopsy ➔ systematic biopsy ➔ saturation biopsy) were cost-effective options at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of US$20,000, with ICERs ranging from US$18,975 to US$19,458. Strategies involving MRI targeted biopsy in the repeat biopsy setting were dominated. Sensitivity analyses found the ICERs were affected mostly by changes to the annual discounting rate and prevalence of prostate cancer in men referred for first biopsy, ranging between US$15,755 to US$23,022. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed Strategy 1 to be the least costly, and Strategies 2 and 4 being the preferred strategies when WTP thresholds were US$20,000 and US$30,000, respectively. LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS: This study found MRI targeted biopsy to be cost-effective in diagnosing prostate cancer in the biopsy-naïve setting in Singapore.

Comparative study of surgical orchidectomy and medical castration in treatment efficacy, adverse effects and cost based on a large prospective metastatic prostate cancer registry.

INTRODUCTION: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) remains the mainstay of treatment for metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) but is associated with significant morbidities. Comparisons of medical castration (MC) and surgical orchidectomy (SO) have yielded varied results. We aimed to evaluate the oncological outcomes, adverse effect (AE) profiles and costs of MC and SO in patients with mPCa. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We reviewed 523 patients who presented with de novo mPCa from a prospectively maintained prostate cancer database over 15 years (2001-2015). All patients received ADT (either MC or SO) within 3 months of diagnosis. The data were analyzed with chi-square, binary and logistics regression models. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty one (28.9%) patients received SO while 372 (71.1%) patients had MC. The median age of presentation was 73 [67 -79] years old. The median prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 280ng/ml [82.4-958]. Three hundred and thirty one patients (66.3%) had high volume bone metastasis and 57 patients (10.9%) had visceral metastasis. Clinical demographics and clinicopathological were similar across both groups. Similar oncological outcomes were observed in both groups. The proportion of PSA response (PSA <1ng/ml) was 65.6% for SO and 67.2% for MC (P = 0.212). Both therapies achieve >95% of effective androgen suppression (testosterone <50ng/dL). Time to castrate-resistance was similar (18 vs 16 months, P = 0.097), with comparative overall survival (42 vs. 38.5 months, P = 0.058) and prostate cancer mortality (80.1 vs. 75.9%, P = 0.328). Similarly, no difference was observed for the 4 AE profiles between SO and MC respectively; change in Haemoglobin (-0.75 vs. -1.0g/dL, P = 0.302), newly diagnosed Diabetes mellitus (4.6 vs. 2.9%, P = 0.281), control measured by HbA1c (0.2 vs. 0.25%, P = 0.769), coronary artery disease events (9.9 vs. 12.9%, P = 0.376) and skeletal-related fractures (9.3 vs. 7.3%, P = 0.476). After adjusting for varying governmental subsidies and inflation rates, the median cost of SO was $5275, compared to MC of $9185.80. CONCLUSION: Both SO and MC have similar oncological outcomes and AE profiles. However, SO remains a much more cost-effective form of ADT for the long-term treatment of mPCa patients.

Does Any Racial Disparity Exist in Oncologic Outcomes After Primary Cryotherapy for Prostate Cancer? A Matched-pair Comparative Analysis of the Cryo On-Line Data Registry.

BACKGROUND: African-American (AA) men have the greatest incidence of and disease-specific mortality from prostate cancer of any racial group. Although encouraging oncologic and functional outcomes have been reported with prostate cancer cryotherapy, little is known about how ethnicity can potentially affect the oncologic outcomes of primary cryotherapy. We report the oncologic outcomes of primary cryotherapy in AA patients through a matched-pair analysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 1:2 (AA to non-AA) cohort of patients was designed using the Cryo-On-Line Data Registry. The 2 arms were matched for patient age, prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, and prostate volume. The oncologic outcome was defined in terms of the biochemical recurrence (BCR) rates after primary cryoablation using Phoenix criteria. The results of "for-cause" post-treatment biopsies and the BCR-free survival rates were also analyzed between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The 1:2 cohort of AA and non-AA men in the present study included 109 and 218 men, respectively. Their median age (69 vs. 71 years; P = .71), median prostate-specific antigen level (6.5 vs. 6.8 ng/mL; P = .95), median prostate volume (32 vs. 30 cm3; P = .31), Gleason score distribution (P = .97), and prostate cancer risk group (P = .12) were similar statistically. The median postoperative follow-up period was also comparable between the 2 groups (AA, 32 months vs. non-AA, 27 months; P = .52). The BCR rates were similar between the AA and non-AA men (14% vs. 17%; P = .52). Likewise, the rate of positive "for-cause" prostate biopsy findings was similar between the 2 groups (AA vs. non-AA, 25% vs. 36%; P = .44). Furthermore, the 5-year biochemical relapse-free survival rates were comparable for the AA and non-AA patients (74% vs. 71%; P = .37). CONCLUSION: When matched for tumor characteristics, cryotherapy as a treatment modality for primary, clinically localized prostate cancer offers men of African-American descent similar oncologic outcomes to those of non-AA men.