Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Prostate Health Index in Decision Making for Initial Prostate Biopsy

Cost Analysis of Prostate Cancer Care Using a Biomarker-enhanced Diagnostic Strategy with Stockholm3

Background and objective

Building on previous research demonstrating better prostate cancer (PC) diagnostics via a biomarker-enhanced approach, this study focuses on cost analysis of PC care using the Stockholm3 test. We assessed the economic impact in European health care systems using real-world evidence for diagnostic outcomes and relevant costs.

Methods

We evaluated two PC diagnostic strategies: (1) the conventional prostate-specific antigen (PSA) strategy with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and (2) PSA testing with a reflex to biomarkers at PSA ≥1.5 ng/ml in guiding decisions to perform MRI. Data from the Swedish National Prostate Cancer Register and Capio St. Göran Hospital provided real-world evidence, supplemented by health economic modeling. A comprehensive cost analysis was conducted using a Markov model for treatment pathways for four PC disease states and overall spending, for which costs from various European health care systems were used. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed across different cost and diagnostic scenarios.

Key finding and limitations

The average cost for the four disease states was €2 182 for benign disease, €10 023 for low-grade disease, €13 073 for intermediate- to high-grade localized or locally advance disease, and €271 210 for metastatic disease. The overall spending was €358 239 (7.7%) lower per 1000 men tested in the biomarker-enhanced strategy in comparison to the PSA strategy. The primary cost saving was attributed to lower treatment expenses for metastatic disease. Sensitivity analysis affirmed the robustness of the findings across various diagnostic and treatment scenarios.

Conclusions and clinical implications

Biomarker-enhanced diagnostic strategies may reduce health care costs for PC management and are likely to improve quality-adjusted life years in a scenario in which metastatic disease is reduced.

Patient summary

We explored different ways to detect prostate cancer more cost-effectively. We found that using a specific blood test, called Stockholm3, after a PSA (prostate-specific antigen) test to decide if an MRI scan (magnetic resonance imaging) is necessary could save money, mainly by identifying localized cancer earlier and reducing the need for expensive treatments for advanced cancer.

Different diagnostic strategies combining prostate health index and magnetic resonance imaging for predicting prostate cancer: A multicentre study

OBJECTIVE

To explore how prostate health index (PHI) and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) should be used in concert to improve diagnostic capacity for clinically significant prostate cancers (CsCaP) in patients with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) between 4 and 20 ng/ml.

METHODS

About 426 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in this study. Univariable and multivariable logistic analyses were performed to analyze the association between the clinical indicators and CaP/CsCaP. We used the Delong test to compare the differences in the area under the curve (AUC) values of four models for CaP and CsCaP. Decision curve analysis (DCA) and calibration plots were used to assess predictive performance. We compared clinical outcomes of different diagnostic strategies constructed using different combinations of the models by the chi-square test and the McNemar test.

RESULTS

The AUC of PHI-MRI (a risk prediction model based on PHI and mpMRI) was 0.859, which was significantly higher than those of PHI (AUC = 0.792, P < 0.001) and mpMRI (AUC = 0.797, P < 0.001). PHI-MRI had a higher net benefit on DCA for predicting CaP and CsCaP in comparison to PHI and mpMRI. Adding the PHI-MRI in diagnostic strategies for CsCaP, such as use PHI-MRI alone or sequential use of PHI followed by PHI-MRI, could reduce the number of biopsies by approximately 20% compared to use PHI followed by mpMRI (256 vs 316, 257 vs 316, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The PHI-MRI model was superior to PHI and MRI alone. It may reduce the number of biopsies and ensure the detection rate of CsCaP under an appropriate sensitivity at the cost of an increased number of MRI scans.

Point-of-Care Prostate Specific Antigen Testing: Examining Translational Progress toward Clinical Implementation

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common male cancer and is attributable to over 375,000 deaths annually. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) is a key biomarker for PCa and therefore measuring patient PSA levels is an important aspect of the diagnostic pathway. Automated immunoassays are currently utilized for PSA analysis, but they require a laboratory setting with specialized equipment and trained personnel. This results in high diagnostic costs, extended therapeutic turnaround times, and restrictions on testing capabilities in resource-limited settings. Consequently, there is a strong drive to develop point-of-care (PoC) PSA tests that can offer accurate, low-cost, and rapid results at the time and place of the patient. However, many emerging PoC tests experience a trade-off between accuracy, affordability, and accessibility which distinctly limits their translational potential. This review comprehensively assesses the translational advantages and limitations of emerging laboratory-level and commercial PoC tests for PSA determination. Electrochemical and optical PSA sensors from 2013 to 2023 are systematically examined. Furthermore, we suggest how the translational potential of emerging tests can be optimized to achieve clinical implementation and thus improve PCa diagnosis globally.

Insurer coverage of prostate cancer biomarkers

INTRODUCTION

Several recently-developed prostate cancer (CaP) biomarkers are recommended per national guidelines, yet feasibility of obtaining these tests is unknown. We used a national database to assess insurance coverage of CaP biomarkers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Insurance policies regarding 4K Score, ExoDx, My Prostate Score, Prostate Cancer Antigen 3, Prostate Health Index, and SelectMDx as of January 1, 2022 were extracted from the policy reporter database. Coverage was defined as a biomarker being deemed medically necessary, conditionally covered, or covered with prior authorization. Overall rates of biomarker coverage were compared by insurance type and region using Chi-squared test. SelectMDx was not covered by any queried policies and was omitted from analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 186 insurance plans were identified among 131 payers. Of the 186 plans, 109 (59%) covered at least one biomarker, with prior authorization required for 38 (35%) of these plans. Prostate Cancer Antigen 3 and 4K Score had higher rates of coverage compared to ExoDx, Prostate Health Index, and My Prostate Score (52% and 43% vs. 26%, 26%, and 5%, respectively, P < 0.01). Medicare plans had higher rates of coverage compared to non-Medicare plans (80% Medicare vs. 17% commercial, 15% federal employer, and 13% Medicaid, P < 0.01), and nationwide plans had higher coverage rates compared to regional plans (43% nationwide vs. 32% midwest, 27% northeast, 25% south, 24% west, P < 0.01). Covered biomarkers under Medicare plans were less likely to require prior authorization compared to those covered by non-Medicare plans (12% Medicare vs. 63% commercial, 100% federal employer, 70% Medicaid, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Coverage of novel CaP biomarkers are relatively robust for Medicare plans but sparse for non-Medicare plans, with the majority of non-Medicare plans requiring prior authorization. Non-Medicare eligible men may face significant barriers to obtaining these tests.

Diagnostic Efficiency of Pan-Immune-Inflammation Value to Predict Prostate Cancer in Patients with Prostate-Specific Antigen between 4 and 20 ng/mL

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate the predictive value of the pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV) and other systemic inflammatory markers, including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (dNLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), for prostate cancer (PCa) and clinically significant prostate cancer (CSPCa) in patients with a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value between 4 and 20 ng/mL.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The clinical data of 319 eligible patients who underwent prostate biopsies in our hospital from August 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. CSPCa was defined as a "Gleason grade group of ≥2". A univariable logistic regression analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis were conducted to analyze the association between the PIV, SII, MLR, and PCa/CSPCa. For the inflammatory indicators included in the multivariable logistic regression analysis, we constructed models by combining the separate inflammatory indicator and other significant predictors and compared the area under the curve (AUC). A nomogram based on the PIV for PCa was developed.

RESULTS

We included 148 PCa patients (including 127 CSPCa patients) and 171 non-PCa patients in total. The patients with PCa were older, had higher MLR, SII, PIV, and total PSA (TPSA) values, consumed more alcohol, and had lower free/total PSA (f/T) values than the other patients. Compared with the non-CSPCa group, the CSPCa group had higher BMI, MLR, PIV, TPSA values, consumed more alcohol, and had lower f/T values. The univariable regression analysis showed that drinking history, higher MLR, PIV, and TPSA values, and lower f/T values were independent predictors of PCa and CSPCa. The AUC of the PIV in the multivariable logistic regression model was higher than those of the MLR and SII. In addition, the diagnostic value of the PIV + PSA for PCa was better than the PSA value. However, the diagnostic value for CSPCa was not significantly different from that of using PSA alone, while the AUC of the PIV + PSA was higher than the individual indicator of the PSA value.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that for the patients who were diagnosed with PSA values between 4 and 20 ng/mL, the PIV and MLR are potential indicators for predicting PCa and CSPCa. In addition, our study indicates that the new inflammatory index PIV has clinical value in the diagnosis of PCa and CSPCa.

Molecular Biomarkers for the Detection of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context

Prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common type of cancer in men. Individualized risk stratification is crucial to adjust decision-making. A variety of molecular biomarkers have been developed in order to identify patients at risk of clinically significant PCa (csPCa) defined by the most common PCa risk stratification systems.

Objective

The present study aims to examine the effectiveness (diagnostic accuracy) of blood or urine-based PCa biomarkers to identify patients at high risk of csPCa.

Evidence acquisition

A systematic review of the literature was conducted. Medline and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2021. Randomized or nonrandomized clinical trials, and cohort and case-control studies were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve were obtained.

Evidence synthesis

Sixty-five studies (N = 34 287) were included. Not all studies included prostate-specific antigen-selected patients. The pooled data showed that the Prostate Health Index (PHI), with any cutoff point between 15 and 30, had sensitivity of 0.95-1.00 and specificity of 0.14-0.33 for csPCa detection. The pooled estimates for SelectMDx test sensitivity and specificity were 0.84 and 0.49, respectively.

Conclusions

The PHI test has a high diagnostic accuracy rate for csPCa detection, and its incorporation in the diagnostic process could reduce unnecessary biopsies. However, there is a lack of evidence on patient-important outcomes and thus more research is needed.

Patient summary

It has been possible to verify that the application of biomarkers could help detect prostate cancer (PCa) patients with a higher risk of poorer evolution. The Prostate Health Index shows an ability to identify 95-100 for every 100 patients suffering from clinically significant PCa who take the test, preventing unnecessary biopsies in 14-33% of men without PCa or insignificant PCa.

New strategy for the identification of prostate cancer: The combination of Proclarix and the prostate health index

OBJECTIVES

Prostate health index (PHI) and, more recently, Proclarix have been proposed as serum biomarkers for prostate cancer (PCa). In this study, we aimed to evaluate Proclarix and PHI for predicting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Proclarix and PHI were measured using samples of 344 men from two different centers. All patients underwent prostate biopsy, and among those, 188 men with PCa on biopsy had an additional radical prostatectomy (RP). All men had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) between 2 and 10 ng/ml. Evaluation of area under the curve (AUC) and performance at predefined cut-offs of Proclarix and PHI risk scores as well as the linear combination thereof was performed to predict csPCa. PSA density was used as an independent comparator.

RESULTS

The cohort median age and PSA were 65 (interquartile range [IQR]: 60-71) and 5.6 (IQR: 4.3-7.2) ng/ml, respectively. CsPCa was diagnosed in 161 (47%) men based on the RP specimen. ROC analysis showed that Proclarix and PHI accurately predicted csPCa with no significant difference (AUC of 0.79 and 0.76, p = 0.378) but significantly better when compared to PSA density (AUC of 0.66, p < 0.001). When using specific cut-offs, Proclarix (cut-off 10) revealed higher specificity and positive predictive value than PHI (cut-off 27) at similar sensitivities. The combination of Proclarix and PHI provided a significant increase in the AUC (p ≤ 0.007) compared to the individual tests alone and the highest clinical benefit was achieved.

CONCLUSION

Results of this study show that both Proclarix and PHI accurately detect the presence of csPCa. The model combining Proclarix and PHI revealed the synergistic effect and improved the diagnostic performance of the individual tests.

Current prostate cancer screening and treatment strategies may not support a holistic nationwide program

The diversity of the United Kingdom population and its health care personnel makes it unique for research into evidence-based prostate cancer screening and management strategies. Therefore, ensuring that appropriate systems and services are available to enhance treatment support for men with underlying risk factors should be a priority for health care providers. More efforts are also needed to ensure the representation of men of Black ethnic origin and underserved populations in future prostate cancer research used to inform clinical guidelines.

Prostate Health Index Density Outperforms Prostate Health Index in Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Detection

Background

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is considered neither sensitive nor specific for prostate cancer (PCa). We aimed to compare total PSA (tPSA), percentage of free PSA (%fPSA), the PSA density (PSAD), Prostate Health Index (PHI), and the PHI density (PHID) to see which one could best predict clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa): a potentially lethal disease.

Methods

A total of 412 men with PSA of 2-20 ng/mL were prospectively included. Serum biomarkers for PCa was collected before transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. PHI was calculated by the formula: (p2PSA/fPSA) x √tPSA. PHID was calculated as PHI divided by prostate volume measured by transrectal ultrasound.

Results

Of the 412 men, 134 (32.5%) and 94(22.8%) were diagnosed with PCa and csPCa, respectively. We used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analyses (DCA) to compare the performance of PSA related parameters, PHI and PHID in diagnosing csPCa. AUC for tPSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA, PSAD, PHI and PHID were 0.56、0.63、0.76、0.74、0.77 and 0.82 respectively for csPCa detection. In the univariate analysis, the prostate volume, tPSA, %fPSA, %p2PSA, PHI, PSAD, and PHID were all significantly associated with csPCa, and PHID was the most important predictor (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.15-1.72). Besides, The AUC of PHID was significantly larger than PHI in csPCa diagnosis (p=0.004). At 90% sensitivity, PHID had the highest specificity (54.1%) for csPCa and could reduce the most unnecessary biopsies (43.7%) and miss the fewest csPCa (8.5%) when PHID ≥ 0.67. In addition to AUC, DCA re-confirmed the clinical benefit of PHID over all PSA-related parameters and PHI in csPCa diagnosis. The PHID cut-off value was positively correlated with the csPCa ratio in the PHID risk table, which is useful for evaluating csPCa risk in a clinical setting.

Conclusion

The PHID is an excellent predictor of csPCa. The PHID risk table may be used in standard clinical practice to pre-select men at the highest risk of harboring csPCa.

Tissue- and Liquid-Based Biomarkers in Prostate Cancer Precision Medicine

Worldwide, prostate cancer (PC) is the second-most-frequently diagnosed male cancer and the fifth-most-common cause of all cancer-related deaths. Suspicion of PC in a patient is largely based upon clinical signs and the use of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. Although PSA levels have been criticised for a lack of specificity, leading to PC over-diagnosis, it is still the most commonly used biomarker in PC management. Unfortunately, PC is extremely heterogeneous, and it can be difficult to stratify patients whose tumours are unlikely to progress from those that are aggressive and require treatment intensification. Although PC-specific biomarker research has previously focused on disease diagnosis, there is an unmet clinical need for novel prognostic, predictive and treatment response biomarkers that can be used to provide a precision medicine approach to PC management. In particular, the identification of biomarkers at the time of screening/diagnosis that can provide an indication of disease aggressiveness is perhaps the greatest current unmet clinical need in PC management. Largely through advances in genomic and proteomic techniques, exciting pre-clinical and clinical research is continuing to identify potential tissue, blood and urine-based PC-specific biomarkers that may in the future supplement or replace current standard practices. In this review, we describe how PC-specific biomarker research is progressing, including the evolution of PSA-based tests and those novel assays that have gained clinical approval. We also describe alternative diagnostic biomarkers to PSA, in addition to biomarkers that can predict PC aggressiveness and biomarkers that can predict response to certain therapies. We believe that novel biomarker research has the potential to make significant improvements to the clinical management of this disease in the near future.

Reply to Jue et al. Value of MRI to Improve Deep Learning Model That Identifies High-Grade Prostate Cancer. Comment on "Gentile et al. Optimized Identification of High-Grade Prostate Cancer by Combining Different PSA Molecular Forms and PSA Density in a Deep Learning Model. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 335"

In their comment "Value of MRI to Improve Deep Learning Model That Identifies High-Grade Prostate Cancer [...].