The Economic Costs of Early Stage Prostate Cancer
The economic costs of early stage prostate cancer are significant, and will likely increase as the proportion of older men grows in the population of industrialised nations. In the US, total costs have been estimated to range from $US1.72 billion to $US4.75 billion annually (1990 costs). Costs related to early stage prostate cancer arise from screening, staging and treatment. Cost-effectiveness models of population-based prostate cancer screening indicate that such screening could result in as much as $US27.9 billion (1988 values) in charges to the US healthcare system. Evidence-based cancer-staging strategies would result in significant reduction of wasted expense.
Rational allocation of healthcare dollars for prostate cancer screening and treatment may ultimately depend on data from randomised controlled trials.
KeywordsProstate Cancer Prostate Specific Antigen Radical Prostatectomy Localise Prostate Cancer Digital Rectal Examination
No sources of funding were used in the preparation of this manuscript. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest directly relevant to the contents of this manuscript.
- 4.Stanford JSRA, Coyle LM, Cerhan J, et al. Prostate cancer trends, 1973–1995. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute, 1999. Report no. 99-4543Google Scholar
- 5.Brown ML. The economic burden of cancer. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc, 1995Google Scholar
- 13.Friedman GD, Hiatt RA, Quesenberry CP, et al. Case control study of screening for prostate cancer by digital rectal examinations. Lancet 1991 Sept 28; 338 (8770): 819Google Scholar
- 15.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Guide to USPSTF clinical preventative services. 2nd ed. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 1996Google Scholar
- 16.Prostate cancer treatment summary statement. Physicians data query [database]. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute, 2002Google Scholar
- 35.Wilt TJ, Brawer MK. The Prostate Cancer Intervention Versus Observation Trial (PIVOT). Oncology (Huntingt) 1997; 11 (8): 1133–9, 1139–4Google Scholar