Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Clinical Research

Prostatectomy at high-volume centers improves outcomes and lowers the costs of care for prostate cancer

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 19, pages 84–91 (2016)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background:

High-volume surgeons with ⩾250 radical prostatectomies provide superior oncological outcomes as evidenced by a lower rate of PSA recurrence (PSAR). The financial benefits of performing prostatectomies at high-volume centers (HVC) are unexplored.

Methods:

A base case—referent scenario—where the share of prostatectomies at high- and low-volume centers were evenly divided at 50% was defined. Additional scenarios with increasing shares of prostatectomies at HVC with 10% increments were also modeled. Using a lower probability of PSAR as the only advantage of more experienced surgeons, the savings that would result from fewer recurrences, avoidance of salvage radiation therapy (SRT) and management of fewer men with metastatic cancer were calculated.

Results:

The savings associated with performing 80% of radical prostatectomy at HVC were $177, $357 and $559 per prostatectomy at 5, 10 and 20 years, respectively. These savings would offset referral costs of up to $1833 per prostatectomy referral at no additional total societal costs. Given the longer average biochemical failure-free survival with prostatectomies at HVC, referral costs of more than $1833 may be cost effective.

Conclusions:

Under the conservative assumption of accounting for lower rates of PSAR as the only benefit of surgery in an HVC, performing prostatectomies at an HVC was associated with savings that may offset part of the initial referral costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ, Serio AM, Eastham JA, Schrag D, Klein EA et al. The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007; 99: 1171–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Vickers AJ, Savage CJ, Hruza M, Tuerk I, Koenig P, Martinez-Pineiro L et al. The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol 2009; 5: 475–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Savage CJ, Vickers AJ . Low annual caseloads of United States surgeons conducting radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2009; 6: 2677–2679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Patel P, Evison F, Goodfellow H, Bryan R, James ND . Evaluation of outcomes following centralization of cystectomy services in the United Kingdom. ASCO Meeting Abstracts 2014; 32: 286.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Birkmeyer JD, Finks JF, O'Reilly A, Oerline M, Carlin AM, Nunn AR et al. Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med 2013; 369: 1434–1442.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Weinstein MC, O'Brien B, Hornberger J, Jackson J, Johannesson M, McCabe C et al. Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices—Modeling Studies. Value Health 2003; 6: 9–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC . Cost-effectiveness in Health And Medicine. Oxford University: New York, USA; Oxford, UK, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, Bridges J, Niessen L, Bass EB et al. Best Practices for Conducting Economic Evaluations in Health Care: A Systematic Review of Quality Assessment Tools. AHRQ Methods for Effective Health Care: Rockville, MD, USA, 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Stitzenberg KB, Wong YN, Nielsen ME, Egleston BL, Uzzo RG . Trends indono radical prostatectomy: centralization, robotics, and access to urologic cancer care. Cancer 2012; 118: 54–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Antonarakis ES, Feng Z, Trock BJ, Humphreys EB, Carducci MA, Partin AW et al. The natural history of metastatic progression in men with prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: long-term follow-up. BJU Int 2012; 109: 32–39.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML . Radiation therapy after radical prostatectomy: impact on metastasis and survival. J Urol 2009; 182: 2708–2714.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cotter SE, Chen MH, Moul JW, Lee WR, Koontz BF, Anscher MS et al. Salvage radiation in men after prostate-specific antigen failure and the risk of death. Cancer 2011; 117: 3925–3932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenberger MA, Chan DW, Pearson JD, Walsh PC . Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA 1999; 281: 1591–1597.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Prostate Cancer Mortality Rates 1990-2012. SEER*Stat software, version 8.2.1. Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute, 2015.

  15. Alibhai SM, Leach M, Tomlinson G, Krahn MD, Fleshner N, Holowaty E et al. 30-day mortality and major complications after radical prostatectomy: influence of age and comorbidity. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005; 97: 1525–1532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Zincke H, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML, Myers RP, Barrett DM, Lieber MM et al. Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: long-term results of 1,143 patients from a single institution. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 2254–2263.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Period Life Table, 2010: Social Security Administration, 2010. Available at http://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html (accessed on 10 September 2015).

  18. Standard Populations (Millions) for Age-Adjustment: Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute, 2012. Available at http://seer.cancer.gov/stdpopulations/index.html (accessed on 10 September 2015).

  19. Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Miller E, Fendrick AM, Weissert WG . Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: in search of a standard. Med Decis Making 2000; 20: 332–342.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Neumann PJ . Using Cost-effectiveness Analysis To Improve Health Care: Opportunities And Barriers. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK; New York, USA, 2005, xii, 209pp.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Vickers A, Savage C, Bianco F, Mulhall J, Sandhu J, Guillonneau B et al. Cancer control and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy as markers of surgical quality: analysis of heterogeneity between surgeons at a single cancer center. Eur Urol 2011; 59: 317–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fee Schedules—General Information Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2015. Available at https://http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare.html (accessed on 10 September 2015).

  23. Yabroff KR, Lamont EB, Mariotto A, Warren JL, Topor M, Meekins A et al. Cost of care for elderly cancer patients in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 630–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Paravati AJ, Boero IJ, Triplett DP, Hwang L, Matsuno RK, Xu B et al. Variation in the cost of radiation therapy among medicare patients with cancer. J Oncol Pract 2015; 11: 403–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. White C . Contrary to cost-shift theory, lower Medicare hospital payment rates for inpatient care lead to lower private payment rates. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013; 32: 935–943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sammon J, Abdollah F, Klett D, Pucheril D, Sood A Diminishing returns of robotic diffusion: complications following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Abstract: PD6-12 2015. Availabe at: http://www.aua2015.org/abstracts/abstractprint.cfm?id=PD6-12 (accessed on 10 September 2015).

  27. Choi WW, Gu X, Lipsitz SR, D'Amico AV, Williams SB, Hu JC . The effect of minimally invasive and open radical prostatectomy surgeon volume. Urologic oncology 2012; 30: 569–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Howards S . Editorial comment. J Urol 2009; 182: 2679–2680 discussion 81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kane RL . Editorial comment. J Urol 2009; 182: 2680–2681 discussion 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Begg CB, Riedel ER, Bach PB, Kattan MW, Schrag D, Warren JL et al. Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1138–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kundu SD, Roehl KA, Eggener SE, Antenor JA, Han M, Catalona WJ . Potency, continence and complications in 3,477 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol 2004; 172: 2227–2231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lance RS, Freidrichs PA, Kane C, Powell CR, Pulos E, Moul JW et al. A comparison of radical retropubic with perineal prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer within the Uniformed Services Urology Research Group. BJU Int 2001; 87: 61–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Walsh PC, Marschke P, Ricker D, Burnett AL . Patient-reported urinary continence and sexual function after anatomic radical prostatectomy. Urology 2000; 55: 58–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Trock BJ, Han M, Freedland SJ, Humphreys EB, DeWeese TL, Partin AW et al. Prostate cancer-specific survival following salvage radiotherapy vs observation in men with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2008; 299: 2760–2769.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project was supported in part by the National Cancer Institute Core Grant P30 CA014089. We acknowledge the valuable contributions and suggestions from Derek Raghavan, MD, PhD, Sanjit Mahanti, Kenneth Lam, MD and Thomas Ahlering, MD.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    A Barzi, T B Dorff, D I Quinn & S Sadeghi

  2. Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA

    E A Klein

Authors
  1. A Barzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E A Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T B Dorff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D I Quinn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S Sadeghi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S Sadeghi.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Barzi, A., Klein, E., Dorff, T. et al. Prostatectomy at high-volume centers improves outcomes and lowers the costs of care for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 19, 84–91 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.56

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2015.56

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links