Same-Day Discharge vs Inpatient Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Complications, Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing, and Patient Satisfaction.

PURPOSE: Historically, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is accompanied by an inpatient hospital admission. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a transition to same-day discharge robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in some centers to free up critically needed inpatient beds. This study aims to compare complications, total health care costs, and patient satisfaction for same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We compared 392 consecutive robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies performed as same-day discharge (n = 206) vs inpatient (n = 186) from February 2020 to November 2022 at 2 academic medical centers. We utilized propensity score analysis to assess the impact of same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy on 30-day complications (primary outcome). Time-driven activity-based costing analysis was applied to compare total costs of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy care, and we administered a validated Patient Satisfaction Outcome Questionnaire to compare satisfaction scores. RESULTS: Inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy patients were more likely to be older, self-reported Black race or Hispanic ethnicity, and have higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Complication rates were nonsignificantly lower for same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.21; P = .8). Same-day discharge vs inpatient robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy demonstrated a $2106 (19%) overall cost reduction. Median satisfaction survey scores were similar, and a clinically significant difference can be excluded. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day discharge robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy is cost-effective and should be the preferred approach in appropriately selected patients.

Robotic Versus Open Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: Synthesizing the Data from Current Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

This is a summary of existing systematic reviews comparing robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open radical cystectomy (ORC). Our aim was to compare operative approaches with respect to perioperative, postoperative, oncologic, and health-related quality of life (QOL) outcomes. We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE, Medline-in-Process and Medline Epubs Ahead of Print, and the Cochrane Library on 22 February 2022. We included reviews of adult patients with bladder cancer undergoing RARC or ORC for muscle invasive or high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. Nonrandomized studies were excluded to minimize confounding and selection bias. The GRADE approach was used to determine the confidence in estimates. We assessed the quality of identified systematic reviews using AMSTAR 2 checklist. Six well-conducted, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. RARC was consistently associated with lower estimated blood loss (EBL) and transfusion rates, and longer operative time. There was inconsistent evidence for the impact of RARC on hospital length of stay (LOS). There was no significant difference in overall complication rate or major complication rate, or oncologic outcomes between groups. Comparison of QOL outcomes between studies was limited by statistical and methodological heterogeneity. RARC is associated with improvement in EBL and transfusion risk. There does not appear to be differences in oncologic outcomes or complications between approaches. Prospective studies are needed to assess the impact of diversion type, technique, and recovery pathways on patient outcomes and to assess the impact of operative approach on cost and patient-reported QOL.

Association between Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer and Mental Health Outcomes.

PURPOSE: We aimed to compare patient-reported mental health outcomes for men undergoing treatment for localized prostate cancer longitudinally over 5 years. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective population-based analysis using the Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (CEASAR) study. Patient-reported depressive symptoms (Centers for Epidemiologic Studies Depression [CES-D]) and domains of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form survey evaluating emotional well-being and energy/fatigue were assessed through 5 years after treatment with surgery, radiotherapy (with or without androgen deprivation therapy) and active surveillance. Regression models were adjusted for outcome-specific baseline function, demographic and clinicopathological characteristics, and treatment approach. RESULTS: A total of 2,742 men (median [quartiles] age 64 [59-70]) met inclusion criteria. Baseline depressive symptoms, as measured by the CES-D, were low (median 4, quartiles 1-8) without differences between groups. We found no effect of treatment modality on depressive symptoms (p=0.78), though older age, poorer health, being unmarried and baseline CES-D score were associated with declines in mental health. There was no clinically meaningful association between treatment modality and scores for either emotional well-being (p=0.81) or energy/fatigue (p=0.054). CONCLUSIONS: This prospective, population-based cohort study of men with localized prostate cancer showed no clinically important differences in mental health outcomes including depressive symptoms, emotional well-being, and energy/fatigue according to the treatment received (surgery, radiotherapy, or surveillance). However, we identified a number of characteristics associated with worse mental health outcomes including: older age, poorer health, being unmarried, and baseline CES-D score which may allow for early identification of patients most at risk of these outcomes following treatment.

Assessment of gender representation in clinical trials leading to FDA approval for oncology therapeutics between 2014 and 2019: A systematic review-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Ensuring representative data accrual in clinical trials is important to safeguard the generalizability of results and to minimize disparities in care. This study's goal was to evaluate differences in gender representation in trials leading to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cancer drug approvals. METHODS: An observational study was conducted from January 2014 to April 2019 using PubMed and the National Institutes of Health trials registry for primary trial reports. The National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program and US Census were consulted for national cancer incidence. The outcome was an enrollment incidence disparity (EID), which was calculated as the difference between male and female trial enrollment and national incidence, with positive values representing male overrepresentation. RESULTS: There were 149 clinical trials with 59,988 participants-60.3% and 39.7% were male and female, respectively-leading to 127 oncology drug approvals. The US incidence rates were 55.4% for men versus 44.6% for women. Gender representation varied by specific tumor type. Most notably, women were underrepresented in thyroid cancer (EID, +27.4%), whereas men were underrepresented in soft tissue cancer (EID, -26.1%). Overall, women were underrepresented when compared with expected incidence (EID, +4.9%; 42% of trials). CONCLUSIONS: For many specific tumor types, women are underrepresented in clinical trials leading to FDA oncology drug approvals. It is critical to better align clinical trial cohort demographics and the populations to which these data will be extrapolated. LAY SUMMARY: This study assesses whether gender disparities exist in clinical trials leading to US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) cancer drug approvals. From January 2014 to April 2019, 149 clinical trials leading to FDA oncology drug approvals showed 60.3% and 39.7% of the enrollees were male and female, respectively. Gender representation varied by specific tumor when compared with the expected incidence rate of cancer in the United States, although women were more often underrepresented. Increased efforts are needed with regard to ensuring equitable representation in oncology clinical trials.

Association between cytoreductive nephrectomy and survival among patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma receiving modern therapies: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining effect modification according to systemic therapy approach.

PURPOSE: Cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) has played a role in treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) since trials demonstrated a survival benefit in patients receiving CN with interferon. With the publication of CARMENA, it became clear that the value of CN may depend on the co-therapy administered. We sought to assess the benefit of CN in the era of modern immunotherapy (IO). METHODS: We performed a systematic review to identify studies assessing CN in patients receiving TT or IO. We extracted multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios for the association between CN and overall survival (OS) and performed random effects meta-analysis. We tested for effect modification by systemic therapy approach on the association between CN and OS by pooling the difference in logHR associated with CN for patients treated with TT versus IO. RESULTS: We identified three comparisons assessing CN in patients receiving TT or IO. Pooled analysis indicated improved survival with CN in both the TT (2 cohorts, pooled HR: 0.52, 95% CI 0.46-0.59; I2 = 80%) and IO era (2 cohorts; pooled HR: 0.28, 95% CI 0.16-0.49; I2 = 21%), with a stronger association in the IO era (p = 0.01; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: In observational datasets, we observed a larger survival benefit to CN in patients treated with IO-based regimens versus those treated with TT-based regimens. While the role of CN for patients receiving TT has recently been questioned, this suggests that the results of CARMENA do not necessarily preclude a benefit to CN when combined with IO-based regimens.

Patient-Reported Financial Toxicity Associated with Contemporary Treatment for Localized Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Contemporary treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer provide comparable overall and cancer-specific survival. However, the degree of financial burden imposed by treatment, the factors contributing to that burden, and how different treatments compare with regard to financial toxicity remain poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (CEASAR) study enrolled men with localized prostate cancer from 2011 to 2012. Questionnaires were collected at 6, 12, 36, and 60 months after enrollment. Differences in patient-reported financial burden were compared between active surveillance, radical prostatectomy, and external beam radiotherapy using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 2,121 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 15% reported large or very large burden of treatment costs within 6 months, declining to 3% by year 5. When controlling for age, education, income and other covariates, external beam radiotherapy was associated with greater financial burden than active surveillance and radical prostatectomy at 1 year (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.1 and OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0-2.3, respectively) and 3 years (OR 3.1 95% CI 1.1-8.8 and OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2-3.7, respectively). Radical prostatectomy and active surveillance had similar rates of financial burden at all time points. Age, race, education, and D'Amico risk group were associated with financial burden. CONCLUSIONS: External beam radiotherapy was associated with the highest financial burden, even when controlling for age, education and income. Prospective studies that directly measure out-of-pocket and indirect costs and account more thoroughly for baseline socioeconomic differences are warranted in order to identify those most at risk.

Prostate cancer mortality and metastasis under different biopsy frequencies in North American active surveillance cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) is an accepted means of managing low-risk prostate cancer. Because of the rarity of downstream events, data from existing AS cohorts cannot yet address how differences in surveillance intensity affect metastasis and mortality. This study projected the comparative benefits of different AS schedules in men diagnosed with prostate cancer who had Gleason score (GS) ≤6 disease and risk profiles similar to those in North American AS cohorts. METHODS: Times of GS upgrading were simulated based on AS data from the University of Toronto, Johns Hopkins University, the University of California at San Francisco, and the Canary Pass Active Surveillance Cohort. Times to metastasis and prostate cancer death, informed by models from the Scandinavian Prostate Cancer Group 4 trial, were projected under biopsy surveillance schedules ranging from watchful waiting to annual biopsies. Outcomes included the risk of metastasis, the risk of death, remaining life-years (LYs), and quality-adjusted LYs. RESULTS: Compared with watchful waiting, AS biopsies reduced the risk of prostate cancer metastasis and prostate cancer death at 20 years by 1.4% to 3.3% and 1.0% to 2.4%, respectively; and 5-year biopsies reduced the risk of metastasis and prostate cancer death by 1.0% to 2.4% and 0.6% to 1.6%, respectively. There was little difference between annual and 5-year biopsy schedules in terms of LYs (range of differences, 0.04-0.16 LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (range of differences, -0.02 to 0.09 quality-adjusted LYs). CONCLUSIONS: Among men diagnosed with GS ≤6 prostate cancer, obtaining a biopsy every 3 or 4 years appears to be an acceptable alternative to more frequent biopsies. Reducing surveillance intensity for those who have a low risk of progression reduces the number of biopsies while preserving the benefit of more frequent schedules.

Assessing the Quality of Surgical Care for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: Results from the CEASAR Study.

PURPOSE: Prior studies suggest that nationally endorsed quality measures for prostate cancer care are not linked closely with outcomes. Using a prospective, population based cohort we measured clinically relevant variation in structure, process and outcome measures in men undergoing radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation (CEASAR) Study enrolled men with clinically localized prostate cancer diagnosed from 2011 to 2012 with 1,069 meeting the final inclusion criteria. Quality of life was assessed using the Expanded Prostate Index Composite (EPIC-26) and clinical data by chart review. Six quality measures were assessed, including pelvic lymphadenectomy with risk of lymph node involvement 2% or greater, appropriate nerve sparing, negative surgical margins, urinary and sexual function, treatment by high volume surgeon, and 30-day and 1-year complications. Receipt of high quality care was compared across categories of race, age, surgeon volume and surgical approach via multivariable analysis. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in quality across race, age or surgeon volume strata, except for worse urinary incontinence in Black men. However, robotic surgery patients experienced fewer complications (3% vs 9.3% short-term and 11% vs 16% long-term), were more likely to be treated by a high volume surgeon (47% vs 25%) and demonstrated better sexual function. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort we did not identify meaningful variation in quality of care across racial groups, age groups and surgeon volume strata, suggesting that men are receiving comparable quality of care across these strata. However, we did find variation between open and robotic surgery with fewer complications, improved sexual function and increased use of high volume surgeons in the robotic group, possibly reflecting differences in quality between approaches, differences in practice patterns and/or biases in patient selection.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Through 5 Years for Active Surveillance, Surgery, Brachytherapy, or External Beam Radiation With or Without Androgen Deprivation Therapy for Localized Prostate Cancer.

Importance: Understanding adverse effects of contemporary treatment approaches for men with favorable-risk and unfavorable-risk localized prostate cancer could inform treatment selection. Objective: To compare functional outcomes associated with prostate cancer treatments over 5 years after treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, population-based cohort study of 1386 men with favorable-risk (clinical stage cT1 to cT2bN0M0, prostate-specific antigen [PSA] ≤20 ng/mL, and Grade Group 1-2) prostate cancer and 619 men with unfavorable-risk (clinical stage cT2cN0M0, PSA of 20-50 ng/mL, or Grade Group 3-5) prostate cancer diagnosed in 2011 through 2012, accrued from 5 Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program sites and a US prostate cancer registry, with surveys through September 2017. Exposures: Treatment with active surveillance (n = 363), nerve-sparing prostatectomy (n = 675), external beam radiation therapy (EBRT; n = 261), or low-dose-rate brachytherapy (n = 87) for men with favorable-risk disease and treatment with prostatectomy (n = 402) or EBRT with androgen deprivation therapy (n = 217) for men with unfavorable-risk disease. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported function, based on the 26-item Expanded Prostate Index Composite (range, 0-100), 5 years after treatment. Regression models were adjusted for baseline function and patient and tumor characteristics. Minimum clinically important difference was 10 to 12 for sexual function, 6 to 9 for urinary incontinence, 5 to 7 for urinary irritative symptoms, and 4 to 6 for bowel and hormonal function. Results: A total of 2005 men met inclusion criteria and completed the baseline and at least 1 postbaseline survey (median [interquartile range] age, 64 [59-70] years; 1529 of 1993 participants [77%] were non-Hispanic white). For men with favorable-risk prostate cancer, nerve-sparing prostatectomy was associated with worse urinary incontinence at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, -10.9 [95% CI, -14.2 to -7.6]) and sexual function at 3 years (adjusted mean difference, -15.2 [95% CI, -18.8 to -11.5]) compared with active surveillance. Low-dose-rate brachytherapy was associated with worse urinary irritative (adjusted mean difference, -7.0 [95% CI, -10.1 to -3.9]), sexual (adjusted mean difference, -10.1 [95% CI, -14.6 to -5.7]), and bowel (adjusted mean difference, -5.0 [95% CI, -7.6 to -2.4]) function at 1 year compared with active surveillance. EBRT was associated with urinary, sexual, and bowel function changes not clinically different from active surveillance at any time point through 5 years. For men with unfavorable-risk disease, EBRT with ADT was associated with lower hormonal function at 6 months (adjusted mean difference, -5.3 [95% CI, -8.2 to -2.4]) and bowel function at 1 year (adjusted mean difference, -4.1 [95% CI, -6.3 to -1.9]), but better sexual function at 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 12.5 [95% CI, 6.2-18.7]) and incontinence at each time point through 5 years (adjusted mean difference, 23.2 [95% CI, 17.7-28.7]), than prostatectomy. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort of men with localized prostate cancer, most functional differences associated with contemporary management options attenuated by 5 years. However, men undergoing prostatectomy reported clinically meaningful worse incontinence through 5 years compared with all other options, and men undergoing prostatectomy for unfavorable-risk disease reported worse sexual function at 5 years compared with men who underwent EBRT with ADT.

Financial Margins for Prostate Cancer Surgery: Quantifying the Impact of Modifiable Cost Inputs in an Episode Based Reimbursement Model.

PURPOSE: The United States health care system is rapidly moving away from fee for service reimbursement in an effort to improve quality and contain costs. Episode based reimbursement is an increasingly relevant value based payment model of surgical care. We sought to quantify the impact of modifiable cost inputs on institutional financial margins in an episode based payment model for prostate cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 157 consecutive patients underwent robotic radical prostatectomy in 2016 at a tertiary academic medical center. We compiled comprehensive episode costs and reimbursements from the most recent urology consultation for prostate cancer through 90 days postoperatively and benchmarked the episode price as a fixed reimbursement to the median reimbursement of the cohort. We identified 2 sources of modifiable costs with undefined empirical value, including preoperative prostate magnetic resonance imaging and perioperative functional recovery counseling visits, and then calculated the impact on financial margins (reimbursement minus cost) under an episode based payment. RESULTS: Although they comprised a small proportion of the total episode costs, varying the use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (33% vs 100% of cases) and functional recovery counseling visits (1 visit in 66% and 2 in 100%) reduced average expected episode financial margins up to 22.6% relative to the margin maximizing scenario in which no patient received these services. CONCLUSIONS: Modifiable cost inputs have a substantial impact on potential operating margins for prostate cancer surgery under an episode based payment model. High cost health systems must develop the capability to analyze individual cost inputs and quantify the contribution to quality to inform value improvement efforts for multiple service lines.

Interpretation of Domain Scores on the EPIC-How Does the Domain Score Translate into Functional Outcomes?

PURPOSE: The EPIC-26 (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-Short Form) is a validated questionnaire for measuring health related quality of life. However, the relationship between domain scores and functional outcomes remains unclear, leading to potential confusion about expectations after treatment. For instance, does a sexual function domain score of 80 mean that a patient can achieve erection sufficient for intercourse? Consequently we sought to determine the relationship between the domain score and the response to obtaining the best possible outcome for each question. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using data from the CEASAR (Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation) study, a multicenter, prospective study of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, we analyzed 11,464 EPIC-26 questionnaires from a total of 2,563 men at baseline through 60 months of followup who were treated with robotic prostatectomy, radiotherapy or active surveillance. We dichotomized every item into its best possible outcome and assessed the percent of men at each domain score who achieved the best result. RESULTS: For every EPIC-26 item the frequency of the best possible outcome was reported by domain score category. For example, a score of 80 to 100 on sexual function corresponded to 97% of men reporting erections sufficient for intercourse while at a score of 40 to 60 only 28% reported adequate erections. Also, at a score of 80 to 100 on the urinary incontinence domain 93% of men reported rarely or never leaking vs 6% at a score of 61 to 80. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate a novel way to interpret EPIC-26 domain scores, demonstrating large variations in the percent of respondents reporting the best possible outcomes over narrow domain score differences. This information may be valuable when counseling men on treatment options.

We do not know what we do not know: innovative approaches to value measurement.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Over the past several years, there has been an increasing focus on improving the 'value' of healthcare delivered, defined as the ratio of clinical outcomes to the costs incurred to achieve them. The former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Sylvia Burwell announced in 2015 that the majority of healthcare payments in the Medicare and Medicaid programmes will align with value by 2018. Although this has yet to fully mature, numerous health systems have restructured with a goal of improving the value of care delivered to their populations. Nevertheless, there remain important unanswered questions regarding how we measure value in the current U.S. healthcare system. The purpose of this review is to highlight innovations that are not only making it easier to measure value but also to improve care from the patient, provider and healthcare system perspectives. RECENT FINDINGS: Behavioural start-ups and the introduction of relatively inexpensive health coaches are starting to permeate the healthcare landscape. These coaches are the consumers' advocate, acting as the quarterback of an extended care team in order to optimize health. Furthermore, time-driven activity-based costing has allowed us to understand costs on a more granular level, and novel tracking software may further automate these costing algorithms in order to better facilitate their dissemination. SUMMARY: We must all work to enable new models of care that improve value by incentivizing individuals, payers and providers to improve health, rather than treat the disease after it manifests. We must also continue to improve the efficiency of healthcare delivery largely through improvements in value measurement.

Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: a matched-pair, bicenter analysis with cost comparison using time-driven activity-based costing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To perform a bicenter, retrospective study of perioperative outcomes of retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN) and assess costs using time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC). We identified 355 consecutive patients who underwent RALPN at University of California Los Angeles and the University of Michigan during 2009-2016. We matched according to RENAL nephrometry score, date, and institution for 78 retroperitoneal versus 78 transperitoneal RALPN. Unadjusted analyses were performed using McNemar's Chi-squared or paired t test, and adjusted analyses were performed using multivariable repeated measures regression analysis. From multivariable models, predicted probabilities were derived according to approach. Cost analysis was performed using TDABC. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients treated with retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal RALPN were similar in age (P = 0.490), sex (P = 0.715), BMI (P = 0.273), and comorbidity (P = 0.393). Most tumors were posterior or lateral in both the retroperitoneal (92.3%) and transperitoneal (85.9%) groups. Retroperitoneal RALPN was associated with shorter operative times (167.0 versus 191.1 min, P = 0.001) and length of stay (LOS) (1.8 versus 2.7 days, P < 0.001). There were no differences in renal function preservation or cancer control. In adjusted analyses, retroperitoneal RALPN was 17.6-min shorter (P < 0.001) and had a 76% lower probability of LOS at least 2 days (P < 0.001). Utilizing TDABC, transperitoneal RALPN added $2337 in cost when factoring in disposable equipment, operative time, LOS, and personnel. SUMMARY: In two high-volume, tertiary centers, retroperitoneal RALPN is associated with reduced operative times and shortened LOS in posterior and lateral tumors, whereas sharing similar clinicopathologic outcomes, which may translate into lower healthcare costs. Further investigation into anterior tumors is needed.

Management of High-grade T1 Urothelial Carcinoma.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The optimal management of high-grade T1 (HGT1) urothelial carcinoma (UC) is complex given its high rate of recurrence, progression, and cancer-specific mortality as well as its clinical variability. Our current treatment paradigm has been supplemented by recent data describing the expanding options for salvage intravesical therapy, bladder preservation, and the promising role of molecular epidemiology. In the current review, we attempt to summarize and critically analyze these studies. RECENT FINDINGS: Evidence describing new intravesical therapies has demonstrated an adequate safety profile and some efficacy in BCG-unresponsive patients who desire bladder preservation. However, response rates are still poor in this high-risk patient population, and it is important to keep these data in perspective when counseling patients. Concomitantly, the continued molecular characterization of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer may suggest potential therapeutic targets as well as predictors of treatment response in the future. The integration of new intravesical therapies and molecular data into the current treatment paradigm for HGT1 urothelial carcinoma will be critical to improving oncologic outcomes in this particularly high-risk population.

Patient-reported outcome measures in urology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Many urologic treatments have similar clinical outcomes, necessitating alternative methods to discriminate between options. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become the new standard for evaluating the patient experience, and their use has drastically increased over the past decade. The purpose of this review is to discuss the status of PROMs in urology, highlight commonly used tools and address their future direction. RECENT FINDINGS: An increasing number of urology-specific PROMs tools have been developed and validated. An increased focus on patient-centered care has provided an impetus for their rise in use. Implementation of PROMs has transitioned from being primarily descriptive in nature to producing actionable findings. Many PROMs are now implemented in daily clinical practice. The future of PROMs will involve new instrument development, integration into clinical practice and the use of PROMs as performance measures. SUMMARY: PROMs are effective tools for characterizing symptom burden and health-related quality of life. With increasing clinical implementation, PROMs are playing an increasing role in patients' clinical decision-making.

Utilizing time-driven activity-based costing to understand the short- and long-term costs of treating localized, low-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Given the costs of delivering care for men with prostate cancer remain poorly described, this article reports the results of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for competing treatments of low-risk prostate cancer. METHODS: Process maps were developed for each phase of care from the initial urologic visit through 12 years of follow-up for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP), cryotherapy, high-dose rate (HDR) and low-dose rate (LDR) brachytherapy, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), and active surveillance (AS). The last modality incorporated both traditional transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) biopsy and multiparametric-MRI/TRUS fusion biopsy. The costs of materials, equipment, personnel, and space were calculated per unit of time and based on the relative proportion of capacity used. TDABC for each treatment was defined as the sum of its resources. RESULTS: Substantial cost variation was observed at 5 years, with costs ranging from $7,298 for AS to $23,565 for IMRT, and they remained consistent through 12 years of follow-up. LDR brachytherapy ($8,978) was notably cheaper than HDR brachytherapy ($11,448), and SBRT ($11,665) was notably cheaper than IMRT, with the cost savings attributable to shorter procedure times and fewer visits required for treatment. Both equipment costs and an inpatient stay ($2,306) contributed to the high cost of RALP ($16,946). Cryotherapy ($11,215) was more costly than LDR brachytherapy, largely because of increased single-use equipment costs ($6,292 vs $1,921). AS reached cost equivalence with LDR brachytherapy after 7 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The use of TDABC is feasible for analyzing cancer services and provides insights into cost-reduction tactics in an era focused on emphasizing value. By detailing all steps from diagnosis and treatment through 12 years of follow-up for low-risk prostate cancer, this study has demonstrated significant cost variation between competing treatments.