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.

  • Paper
  • Published:

A quantitative analysis of the costs and benefits of prostate cancer screening

Abstract

The present study attempts to quantitate in an economically and clinically meaningful manner the cost and cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening and subsequent treatment, including complications from that treatment. Outcome data from large prostate cancer screening trials using prostate specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE) and PSA alone were used to construct the screening model. The benefit of screening is expressed in years of life saved by screening, which is calculated by comparing the survival rate of men with prostate cancer to the survival rate of men in the general population. The cost of screening, treatment, and complications were estimated using the Medicare data base and published reports on the cost, morbidity and mortality for radical prostatectomy. The cost per year of life saved by prostate cancer screening with PSA and DRE was $2339–3005 for men aged 50–59, $3905–5070 for men aged 60–69, and $3574–4627 overall for men aged 50–69. The cost per year of life saved by prostate cancer screening with PSA alone for men aged 50–70 was $3822–4956. A sensitivity analysis demonstrates that the cost per year of life saved by prostate cancer screening will not change substantially even if the assumptions in this model have been underestimated or overestimated by 100%. This study quantifies only those parameters which can be reliably compared in concrete terms such as dollars, treatment impact on survival, published complication rates and published treatment costs. Using this type of analysis, prostate cancer screening appears to be a cost-effective intervention. However, the issue of whether prostate cancer screening is cost-effective will be decided definitively only when randomized, controlled trials are available to quantify the costs and benefits of prostate cancer screening.

.

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

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fleming C et al A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1993 269 2650–2658

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Krahn MD et al Screening for prostate cancer: a decision analytic view. JAMA 1994 272 773–780

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Greenlee RT, Murray T, Bolden S, Wingo PA Cancer statistics, 2000. CA Cancer J Clin 2000 50 7–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Richie JP et al Effect of patient age on early detection of prostate cancer with serum prostate-specific antigen and digital rectal examination. Urology 1993 42 365–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Catalona WJ et al Detection of organ confined prostate cancer is increased through prostate-specific antigen-based screening. JAMA 1993 270 948–954

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Jewett HJ, Bridge RW, Gray GF, Shelley WM The palpable nodule of prostatic cancer: results 15 y after radical excision. JAMA 1968 203 115–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Myers RP, Fleming TR Course of localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate treated by radical prostatectomy. Prostate 1983 4 461–472

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Veenema RJ, Gursel EO, Lattimer JK Radical retropubic prostatectomy for cancer: a 20-year experience. J Urol 1977 117 330–331

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Grönberg H, Damber J-E, Jonnson J, Lenner P Patient age as a prognostic factor in prostate cancer. J Urol 1994 152 892–895

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Keetch DW, Andriole GL, Catalona WJ Complications of radical retropubic prostatectomy. AUA Update Series 1994 13 45–52

    Google Scholar 

  11. Igel TC et al Perioperative and postoperative complications for bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol 1987 137 1189–1191

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mark DH Mortality of patients after radical prostatectomy: analysis of recent medicare claims. J Urol 1994 152 896–898

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Benoit RM, Naslund MJ An economic rationale for prostate cancer screening. Urology 1994 44 795–803

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. The Health Care Financing Administration, The Bureau of Data Management and Strategy, and The Office of Statistics and Data Management: 1992 Part B Extract and Summary System Data. Baltimore, MD 1993

  15. Kramolowsky EV Many factors influence hospital charges for radical retropubic prostatectomy. AUA Today 1993 6 2–10

    Google Scholar 

  16. Optenberg SA, Thompson IM Economics of screening for carcinoma of the prostate. Urol Clin North Am 1990 17 719–737

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Prostate Surgery Expenses, 1991 Sta Bull Metrop Insur Co 1993 Apr–Mar 18–27

  18. Steiner MS, Morton RA, Walsh PC Impact of anatomical radical prostatectomy on urinary incontinence. J Urol 1991 145 512–515

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Leandri P, Rossignol G, Gautier J-R, Ramon J Radical retropubic prostatectomy: morbidity and quality of life experience with 620 cases. J Urol 1992 147 883–887

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gibbons RP Total prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: long-term surgical results and current morbidity. NCI Monogr 1988 7 123–126

    Google Scholar 

  21. Fowler FJ et al Patient-reported complications and follow-up after radical prostatectomy. Urology 1993 42 622–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kageyama S et al Collagen implantation for post-prostatectomy incontinence: early experience with a transrectal ultrasonographically guided method. J Urol 1994 152 1473–1475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Surya BV, Provet J, Johanson K-E, Brown J Anastomotic strictures following radical prostatectomy: risk factors and management. J Urol 1990 143 755–758

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Thompson IM et al Impact of routine screening for adenocarcinoma of the prostate on stage disribution. J Urol 1984 137 424–426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thompson IM, Ernst JJ, Gangai MP, Spence CR Adenocarcinoma of the prostate: results of routine urological screening. J Urol 1984 132 690–692

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Chodak GW Questioning the value of screening for prostate cancer in asymptomatic men. Urology 1993 42 116–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Hinman F Screening for prostatic carcinoma. J Urol 1991 145 126–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Littrup PJ, Lee F, Mettlin C Prostate cancer screening: current trends and future implications. CA Cancer J Clin 1992 42 198–211

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Littrup PJ, Goodman AC, Mettlin CJ The benefit and cost of prostate cancer early detection. The Investigators of the American Cancer Society-National Prostate Cancer Detection Project. CA Cancer J Clin 1993 43 134–149

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Brawer MK Screening for prostate cancer. Monogr Urol 1994 15 1–24

    Google Scholar 

  31. Brawer MK et al Screening for prostatic carcinoma with prostate specific antigen: results of the second year. J Urol 1993 150 106–109

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Walsh PC Radical retropubic prostatectomy with reduced morbidity: an anatomic approach. NCI Monogr 1988 7 133–137

    Google Scholar 

  33. Johansson J-E et al High 10-year survival rate in patients with early, untreated prostatic cancer. JAMA 1992 267 2191–2196

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Albertsen PC et al Long-term survival among men with conservatively treated localized prostate cancer. JAMA 1995 274 626–631

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Benoit RM, Naslund MJ Detection of latent prostate cancer from routine screening: comparison with breast cancer screening. Urology 1995 46 533–537

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Stormont TJ et al Clinical stage B0 or T1c prostate cancer: nonpalpable disease identified by elevated serum prostate-specific antigen concentration. Urology 1993 41 3–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to RM Benoit.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Benoit, R., Grönberg, H. & Naslund, M. A quantitative analysis of the costs and benefits of prostate cancer screening. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 4, 138–145 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500510

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.pcan.4500510

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links