4.4 Article

Cost-effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening: A Simulation Study Based on ERSPC Data

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju366

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development [ZonMW 002822820, 22000106, 50-50110-98-311]
  2. Dutch Cancer Society [KWF 94-869, 98-1657, 2002-277, 2006-3518]
  3. Europe Against Cancer
  4. fifth and sixth framework program of the European Union
  5. Beckman Coulter
  6. Dutch Cancer Society, The Netherlands [KWF 94-869, 98-1657, 2002-277, 2006-3518]
  7. Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, The Netherlands [ZonMW 002822820, 22000106, 50-50110-98-311]
  8. Europe against Cancer, Belgium
  9. Flemish Ministry of Welfare, Belgium
  10. Public Health and Family, Belgium
  11. Province and City of Antwerp, Belgium
  12. Public Centre for Social Welfare Antwerp, Belgium
  13. Abbott Pharmaceuticals, Sweden
  14. Af Jochnick's Foundation, Sweden
  15. Catarina and Sven Hagstroms Family Foundation, Sweden
  16. Gunvor and Ivan Svensson's Foundation, Sweden
  17. Johanniterorden, Sweden
  18. King Gustav V Jubilee Clinic Cancer Research Foundation, Sweden
  19. Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Sweden
  20. Schering Plough, Sweden
  21. Swedish Cancer Society, Sweden
  22. Wallac Oy, Sweden
  23. Turku, Finland, Sweden
  24. Academy of Finland, Finland [123054, 260931]
  25. Cancer Society of Finland, Finland
  26. Competitive Research Funding of the Pirkanmaa Hospital District, Finland
  27. Perkin Elmer-Wallac, Finland
  28. Italian League for the Fight aganist Cancer (LILT Lega Italiana per la Lotta contro i Tumori), Italy
  29. Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro), Italy
  30. National Research Council (CNR Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Tuscany), Italy
  31. Region (Regione Toscana), Italy
  32. Spanish Fondo de Investigacion Sanitaria (FIS), Spain [96/0248, 99/0245, 02/0732, 06/0831]
  33. Horten Foundation, Switzerland
  34. Aargau Cancer League, Switzerland
  35. Swiss Cancer League, Switzerland [KFS 787-2-1999, 01112-02-2001]
  36. Health Department of Canton Aargau, Switzerland
  37. Prostate Cancer Research Foundation, Switzerland
  38. Baugarten Foundation, Switzerland
  39. Messerli Foundation, Switzerland
  40. European Union [SOC 95 35109, SOC 96 201869 05F022, SOC 97 201329, SOC 98 32241]
  41. 6th Framework Program of the EU: PMark [LSHC-CT-2004-503011]
  42. Beckman-Coulter-Hybritech, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The results of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) trial showed a statistically significant 29% prostate cancer mortality reduction for the men screened in the intervention arm and a 23% negative impact on the life-years gained because of quality of life. However, alternative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening strategies for the population may exist, optimizing the effects on mortality reduction, quality of life, overdiagnosis, and costs. Based on data of the ERSPC trial, we predicted the numbers of prostate cancers diagnosed, prostate cancer deaths averted, life-years and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, and cost-effectiveness of 68 screening strategies starting at age 55 years, with a PSA threshold of 3, using microsimulation modeling. The screening strategies varied by age to stop screening and screening interval (one to 14 years or once in a lifetime screens), and therefore number of tests. Screening at short intervals of three years or less was more cost-effective than using longer intervals. Screening at ages 55 to 59 years with two-year intervals had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $73000 per QALY gained and was considered optimal. With this strategy, lifetime prostate cancer mortality reduction was predicted as 13%, and 33% of the screen-detected cancers were overdiagnosed. When better quality of life for the post-treatment period could be achieved, an older age of 65 to 72 years for ending screening was obtained. Prostate cancer screening can be cost-effective when it is limited to two or three screens between ages 55 to 59 years. Screening above age 63 years is less cost-effective because of loss of QALYs because of overdiagnosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据