Johan Lyth, Swen-Olof Andersson, Ove Andrén, Jan-Erik Johansson, Per Carlsson, Nosrat Shahsavar
{"title":"A decision support model for cost-effectiveness of radical prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer.","authors":"Johan Lyth, Swen-Olof Andersson, Ove Andrén, Jan-Erik Johansson, Per Carlsson, Nosrat Shahsavar","doi":"10.3109/00365599.2011.615759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to develop a probabilistic decision support model to calculate the lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between radical prostatectomy and watchful waiting for different patient groups.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A randomized trial (SPCG-4) provided most data for this study. Data on survival, costs and quality of life were inputs in a decision analysis, and a decision support model was developed. The model can generate cost-effectiveness information on subgroups of patients with different characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Age was the most important independent factor explaining cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness value varied from 21,026 Swedish kronor (SEK) to 858,703 SEK for those aged 65 to 75 years, depending on Gleason scores and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values. Information from the decision support model can support decision makers in judging whether or not radical prostatectomy (RP) should be used to treat a specific patient group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The cost-effectiveness ratio for RP varies with age, Gleason scores, and PSA values. Assuming a threshold value of 200,000 SEK per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, for patients aged ≤70 years the treatment was always cost-effective, except at age 70, Gleason 0-4 and PSA ≤10. Using the same threshold value at age 75, Gleason 7-9 (regardless of PSA) and Gleason 5-6 (with PSA >20) were cost-effective. Hence, RP was not perceived to be cost-effective in men aged 75 years with low Gleason and low PSA. Higher threshold values for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer could be discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":21543,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology","volume":"46 1","pages":"19-25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00365599.2011.615759","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/00365599.2011.615759","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/9/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to develop a probabilistic decision support model to calculate the lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between radical prostatectomy and watchful waiting for different patient groups.
Material and methods: A randomized trial (SPCG-4) provided most data for this study. Data on survival, costs and quality of life were inputs in a decision analysis, and a decision support model was developed. The model can generate cost-effectiveness information on subgroups of patients with different characteristics.
Results: Age was the most important independent factor explaining cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness value varied from 21,026 Swedish kronor (SEK) to 858,703 SEK for those aged 65 to 75 years, depending on Gleason scores and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) values. Information from the decision support model can support decision makers in judging whether or not radical prostatectomy (RP) should be used to treat a specific patient group.
Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness ratio for RP varies with age, Gleason scores, and PSA values. Assuming a threshold value of 200,000 SEK per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, for patients aged ≤70 years the treatment was always cost-effective, except at age 70, Gleason 0-4 and PSA ≤10. Using the same threshold value at age 75, Gleason 7-9 (regardless of PSA) and Gleason 5-6 (with PSA >20) were cost-effective. Hence, RP was not perceived to be cost-effective in men aged 75 years with low Gleason and low PSA. Higher threshold values for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer could be discussed.