The cost-effectiveness of active surveillance compared to watchful waiting and radical prostatectomy for low risk localised prostate cancer

High-intensity interval training versus moderate-intensity continuous training for localized prostate cancer under active surveillance: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

High-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) have been increasingly adopted for localized prostate cancer (PCa) under active surveillance (AS). However, it is unclear which training modality is the most favorable in terms of cardiorespiratory fitness and biochemical progression.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane and Embase for relevant RCTs. PRISMA guideline was adopted to ensure optimal conduct of this study. Serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) and peak VO2 were selected as primary outcomes and PSA doubling time (PSADT) and testosterone were selected as secondary outcomes. Only articles written in English were included. Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for risk of bias evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 501 studies were selected. Six RCTs with 222 patients were included for data extraction and analysis. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) group demonstrated significantly lower PSA compared with usual care (UC) (MD = -1.4; 95%CI = -2.77 to -0.03) and moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT) group (MD = -1.67; 95%CI = -3.30 to -0.05). Both HIIT and MICT showed significantly improved peak VO2 compared with UC. No significant difference was observed in PSADT and testosterone among different training modalities and UC. Regarding peak VO2, MICT had the highest surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores (98.1%). For serum PSA, HIIT had the highest probability (97.8%) to be the training with the highest efficacy. The potential source of bias mainly came from poorly performed allocation concealment and blinding strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study indicated that HIIT and MICT showed considerable cardiorespiratory benefits for localized PCa. HIIT was preferred over MICT in biochemical progression control in terms of decreasing serum PSA levels. However, MICT was favored over HIIT regarding cardiorespiratory benefits. The findings of this study may facilitate future lifestyle intervention, particularly in the form of physical training, for individuals diagnosed with localized PCa under AS.

Economic value of knowing BRCA status: BRCA testing for prostate cancer prevention and optimal treatment

BACKGROUND

We aimed to estimate the incremental lifetime effects, costs, and net-monetary-benefit (NMB) of knowing BRCA information by testing of patients with low-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) in the US and guiding subsequent screening and treatment, and the cumulative savings or losses of yearly cohort testing over 16 years. We compared two strategies: (1)'with BRCA information' and (2)'without BRCA information.' We also estimated the expected value of perfect information.

METHODS

The incremental NMB (INMB) quantified the monetized benefit per person of knowing BRCA status. The net-monetized-value of knowing BRCA information was estimated by multiplying the INMB with the eligible population.

RESULTS

The INMBs of knowing BRCA information were $43,357 (payer) and $43,487 (society). in payer and societal perspectives, respectively. Escalated to the eligible patients in 2020, knowing BRCA status resulted in net monetized lifetime value of $1.7 billion (payer and society) for the 2020 cohort; and yielded accumulated net-monetized-value of $28.0 billion (payer) and $28.1 billion (society) over 16 yearly cohorts of eligible PCa patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The economic value of knowing BRCA status for all low-risk localized PCa patients in the US provides short-term and long-term evidence for BRCA testing to screen early and optimize treatment.

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.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of primary treatments for localised prostate cancer: A population-based Markov analysis using real-world evidence

OBJECTIVE

We evaluate cost-effectiveness of primary treatments for localised prostate cancer by uniquely combining prospectively collected real-world outcomes and costs from UCSF Cancer of Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE™).

METHODS

Markov models assessed cost-effectiveness of radical prostatectomy (RP), brachytherapy, electron beam radiation therapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy with EBRT by risk from US payers perspective over 8 years. Treatment costs included office visits, hospitalisation, procedures, medication and long-term care. Patients' surveyed HRQoL were mapped into utilities. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) used cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and willingness-to-pay of $150,000/QALY.

RESULTS

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) showed for low-risk prostate cancer, EBRT dominated the lowest cost brachytherapy, but RPns and brachytherapy plus EBRT were cost-effective compared to brachytherapy with ICERs of $18,926 and $41,662 per QALY. In medium-risk patients, RP, EBRT and brachytherapy plus EBRT all were cost-effective compared with brachytherapy, with ICERs of $30,604, $22,588 and $21,627/QALY. In high-risk, brachytherapy dominated all treatments. Procedure cost and utility are driving ICER, but probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed the model was robust across variables.

CONCLUSION

This first CEA combining prospective real-world evidence for HRQOL outcomes with costs shows cost-effectiveness of treatments vary by risk groups, providing new evidence for treatment decisions.

The Economic Burden of Localized Prostate Cancer and Insights Derived from Cost-Effectiveness Studies of the Different Treatments

Prostate cancer has huge health and societal impacts, and there is no clear consensus on the most effective and efficient treatment strategy for this disease, particularly for localized prostate cancer. We have reviewed the scientific literature describing the economic burden and cost-effectiveness of different treatment strategies for localized prostate cancer in OECD countries. We initially identified 315 articles, studying 13 of them in depth (those that met the inclusion criteria), comparing the social perspectives of cost, time period, geographical area, and severity. The economic burden arising from prostate cancer due to losses in productivity and increased caregiver load is noticeable, but clinical decision-making is carried out with more subjective variability than would be advisable. The direct cost of the intervention was the main driver for the treatment of less severe cases of prostate cancer, whereas for more severe cases, the most important determinant was the loss in productivity. Newer, more affordable radiotherapy strategies may play a crucial role in the future treatment of early prostate cancer. The interpretation of our results depends on conducting thorough sensitivity analyses. This approach may help better understand parameter uncertainty and the methodological choices discussed in health economics studies. Future results of ongoing clinical trials that are considering genetic characteristics in assessing treatment response of patients with localized prostate cancer may shed new light on important clinical and pharmacoeconomic decisions.

Rapid Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer Disease Progression Using Paper Spray Ionization Mass Spectrometry

The limitation of prostate specific antigen (PSA) for prostate cancer (PC) diagnosis is well-recognized. The Gleason score (GS) has been the most widely used grading system for prostate tumor differentiation and represents the best-established prognostic indicator for prostate cancer progression. However, a rapid and sensitive noninvasive diagnostic marker that differentiates GS-based prostate cancer disease progression is needed. As PC is becoming a leading cause of cancer related death for men in the U.S. and worldwide, an immediate need exists for an improved, sensitive, noninvasive, and rapid diagnostic test for PC screening. Here, we employed paper spray ionization-mass spectrometry (PSI MS)-based global metabolomics of urine liquid biopsies to distinguish between healthy (negative for any prostate specific health problems) and progressive PC states (low grade PC such as GS6 and high-grade PC such as GS7, GS8, and GS9). For PSI-MS-based direct untargeted metabolic investigation, a raw urine sample was directly pipetted onto a triangular paper substrate, without any additional sample preparation. Multivariate statistical analysis revealed distinct GS-specific metabolic signatures compared to a healthy control. Variable importance in projection from partial least-squares-discriminant analysis showed distinct metabolic patterns that were correlatively elevated with progressive disease and could serve as biomarkers for diagnosis of prostate cancer risk categorization.

Feasibility of in-office MRI-targeted partial gland cryoablation for prostate cancer: an IDEAL stage 2A study

Objectives

Cryoablation for prostate cancer is typically performed under general anaesthesia. We explore the safety, feasibility and costs of in-office MRI-targeted prostate partial gland cryoablation (PGC) under local anaesthesia. We hypothesise that an office-based procedure under local anaesthesia may yield greater patient convenience and lower health costs with similar outcomes to a general anaesthesia approach.

Design/participants/setting/interventions

Retrospective study of men diagnosed with clinically significant prostate cancer (grade group (GG) ≥2) who elected to undergo in-office PGC under local anaesthesia.

Main outcome measures

A total of 55 men with GG ≥2 prostate cancer underwent PGC under local anaesthesia, and 35 of 43 men (81.4%) who attained ≥6 months of follow-up post-treatment underwent MRI-targeted surveillance biopsy. We used MRI findings and targeted biopsy to characterise post-PGC oncological outcomes. Complications were categorised using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE). Expanded Prostate Cancer Index-Clinical Practice was used to characterise urinary and sexual function scores at baseline, 4 and 9 months post-PGC. Time-driven activity-based costing was used to determine healthcare costs of in-office PGC.

Results

Five (9.1%) men experienced CTCAE score 3 adverse events. Urinary and sexual function did not change significantly from baseline to 4 months (p=0.20 and p=0.08, respectively) and 9 months (p=0.23 and p=0.67, respectively). Twenty-two men (62.9%) had no cancer or GG1 and 13 (37.1%) men had GG≥2 on post-PGC biopsy. Moreover, the median cost of in-office PGC was US$4,463.05 (range US$4,087.19–US7,238.16) with disposables comprising 69% of the cost.

Conclusions

In-office PGC is feasible under local anaesthesia with favourable functional outcome preservation and adverse events profile at significantly lower costs compared with a general anaesthesia approach.

The ProtecT randomised trial cost-effectiveness analysis comparing active monitoring, surgery, or radiotherapy for prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence relating to the cost-effectiveness of treatments for localised prostate cancer.

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness of active monitoring, surgery, and radiotherapy was evaluated within the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment (ProtecT) randomised controlled trial from a UK NHS perspective at 10 years' median follow-up. Prostate cancer resource-use collected from hospital records and trial participants was valued using UK reference-costs. QALYs (quality-adjusted-life-years) were calculated from patient-reported EQ-5D-3L measurements. Adjusted mean costs, QALYs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated; cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty; subgroup analyses considered age and disease-risk.

RESULTS

Adjusted mean QALYs were similar between groups: 6.89 (active monitoring), 7.09 (radiotherapy), and 6.91 (surgery). Active monitoring had lower adjusted mean costs (£5913) than radiotherapy (£7361) and surgery (£7519). Radiotherapy was the most likely (58% probability) cost-effective option at the UK NICE willingness-to-pay threshold (£20,000 per QALY). Subgroup analyses confirmed radiotherapy was cost-effective for older men and intermediate/high-risk disease groups; active monitoring was more likely to be the cost-effective option for younger men and low-risk groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer follow-up and modelling are required to determine the most cost-effective treatment for localised prostate cancer over a man's lifetime.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN20141297: http://isrctn.org (14/10/2002); ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02044172: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (23/01/2014).

Tumor characteristics, treatments, and survival outcomes in prostate cancer patients with a PSA level < 4 ng/ml: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

To examine the tumor characteristics, treatments and survival outcomes of prostate cancer (PCa) patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level < 4 ng/ml.

METHODS

Of 205,913 men with primary prostate adenocarcinoma in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database (2010 to 2015), 24,054 (11.68%) patients were diagnosed with a PSA level < 4 ng/ml. Comparisons of categorical variables among different groups were performed by using the Chi square test. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was adjusted for age, ethnicity, marital status, insurance status, TNM stage, Gleason grade, treatment and survival. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed for overall mortality and tested by the log-rank test.

RESULTS

PCa patients with a PSA level < 4 ng/ml generally had more favorable tumor characteristics: younger, lower T stage, lower Gleason grade and lower lymph node metastasis rate. However, there were more patients in stage M1 in the group of PSA level < 4 ng/ml than that in the groups of PSA level of 4-10 ng/ml, 10-20 ng/ml and > 20 ng/ml. The multivariate Cox regression model revealed that overall mortality was associated with age, marital status, race, Gleason grade, M stage and treatment approach.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, PCa patients with a PSA level < 4 ng/ml have more favorable tumor characteristics at diagnosis and receive more benefit from active treatment. However, those patients with advanced TNM stage and high Gleason grade should be paid more attention in clinical application.

A Cost-Effectiveness and Quality of Life Analysis of Different Approaches to the Management and Treatment of Localized Prostate Cancer

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of active monitoring (AM), radical prostatectomy (PR), and external-beam radiotherapy with neoadjuvant hormone therapy (RT) for localized prostate cancer. Microsimulations of radical prostatectomy, 3D-conformal radiotherapy, or active monitoring were performed using Medicare reimbursement schedules and clinical trial results for a target population of men aged 50–69 years with newly diagnosed localized prostate cancer (T1-T2, NX, M0) over a time horizon of 10 years. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs were assessed and sensitivity analyses performed. Monte Carlo simulations revealed that the mean cost for AM, PR, and RT were $15,654, $18,791, and $30,378, respectively, and QALYs were 6.96, 7.44, and 7.9 years, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $6,548 for PR over AM and $68,339 for RT over PR. Results were sensitive to the number of years of follow-up and procedure cost. With relaxed assumptions for AM, the ICER of PR and RT met the societal willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY. Compared with AM, PR was highly cost-effective. RT and PR for localized prostate cancer can be cost-effective, but RT must offer increased QALYs or decreased procedural costs to be cost-effective compared to PR. Newer and cheaper radiotherapy strategies like stereotactic body radiotherapy may play a crucial role in future early prostate cancer management.

Active surveillance for prostate and thyroid cancers: evolution in clinical paradigms and lessons learned

The adverse effects of overdiagnosis and overtreatment observed in men with clinically insignificant prostate cancers after the introduction of prostate-specific antigen-based screening are now being observed in those with thyroid cancer, owing to the introduction of new imaging technologies. Thus, the evolving paradigm of active surveillance in prostate and thyroid cancers might be valuable in informing the development of future active surveillance protocols. The lessons learned from active surveillance and their implications include the need to minimize the use of broad, population-based screening programmes that do not incorporate patient education and the need for individualized or shared decision-making, which can decrease the extent of overtreatment. Furthermore, from the experience in patients with prostate cancer, we have learned that consensus is required regarding the optimal selection of patients for active surveillance, using more-specific evidence-based methods for stratifying patients by risk. In this Review, we describe the epidemiology, pathology and screening guidelines for the management of patients with prostate and thyroid cancers; the evidence of overdiagnosis and overtreatment; and provide overviews of existing international active surveillance protocols.

Exercise duRing Active Surveillance for prostatE cancer-the ERASE trial: a study protocol of a phase II randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Active surveillance (AS) is the preferred primary treatment strategy for men with low-risk clinically localised prostate cancer (PCa); however, the majority of these men still receive radical treatment within 10 years due to disease progression and/or fear of cancer progression. Interventions designed to suppress tumour growth, mitigate fear of cancer progression and precondition men for impending radical treatments are an unmet clinical need. Exercise has been shown to delay the progression of prostate tumours in animal models, improve physical and functional health and manage psychological outcomes in cancer patients; however, these outcomes have not been demonstrated in PCa patients undergoing AS.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This phase II randomised controlled trial will randomise 66 men undergoing AS to either an exercise group or a usual care group. The exercise group will perform a 12-week, supervised, high-intensity interval training programme, consisting of 3 sessions/week for 28-40 min/session. The primary outcome will be cardiorespiratory fitness. Secondary outcomes will include immunosurveillance and cancer-related biomarkers, psychosocial outcomes including fear of cancer progression and quality of life and physical function. Exploratory outcomes will include clinical indicators of disease progression. The trial has 80% power to detect a significant between-group difference in VO2peak of 3.5 mL/kg/min with a two-tailed alpha level <0.05 and a 10% dropout rate.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has received full ethical approval from the Health Research Ethics Board of Alberta - Cancer Committee (Protocol Number: HREBA.CC-17-0248). The findings of the study will be disseminated through public and scientific channels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03203460; Pre-results.