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.

  • Article
  • Clinical Research
  • Published:

The cost-effectiveness of prostate health index for prostate cancer detection in Chinese men

Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases volume 23, pages 615–621 (2020)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and prostate health index (PHI) have been used as biomarkers for prostate cancer detection. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PHI for prostate cancer detection in Chinese men.

Method

We developed a Markov model for Chinese male patient aged 50–75 years old. The PSA strategy was to offer TRUS-PB for all patients with elevated PSA of 4–10 ng/mL. The PHI strategy was to offer PHI for patients with elevated PSA of 4–10 ng/mL. TRUS-PB would only be offered for patients with PHI >35.0. Model inputs were extracted from local data when available. The cost per quality-adjusted life years gained for both strategies were calculated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in relation to the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold were compared. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were also constructed.

Results

With a Markov model of 25 screening cycles from age 50 to 75 years, the mean total costs per man were estimated to be USD 27,439 in the PSA strategy and USD 22,877 in the PHI strategy. The estimated effects were estimated to be 15.70 in the PSA strategy and 16.05 in the PHI strategy. The PHI strategy was associated with an expected decrease in cost of USD 4562 and an expected gain of 0.35 QALY, resulting in an ICER of USD −13056.56. The results were shown to be robust upon one-way sensitivity analysis. Upon Monte Carlo simulation, the PHI strategy was more cost-effective for 100% of the iterations. The PHI strategy demonstrated dominance over the PSA strategy regardless of what WTP threshold we use.

Conclusions

A PHI-based screening strategy may be more cost-effective than a PSA-based strategy for prostate cancer detection in Chinese men. These results support consideration of a PHI-based approach for prostate cancer in Hong Kong.

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

Fig. 1: Decision tree comparing between the PSA and PHI strategies.
Fig. 2: Tornado diagram showing the changes in net monetary benefits upon changes in the parameter values.
Fig. 3: The cost-effectiveness plane for the comparison between the PSA and PHI strategies.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Catalona WJ, Smith DS, Ratliff TL, Dodds KM, Coplen DE, Yuan JJ, et al. Measurement of prostate-specific antigen in serum as a screening test for prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1991;324:1156–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Teoh JY, Yuen SK, Tsu JH, Wong CK, Ho BS, Ng AT, et al. The performance characteristics of prostate-specific antigen and prostate-specific antigen density in Chinese men. Asian J Androl. 2017;19:113–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Teoh JY, Yuen SK, Tsu JH, Wong CK, Ho B, Ng AT, et al. Prostate cancer detection upon transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in relation to digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen level: what to expect in the Chinese population? Asian J Androl 2015;17:821–5.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Catalona WJ, Richie JP, Ahmann FR, Hudson MA, Scardino PT, Flanigan RC, et al. Comparison of digital rectal examination and serum prostate specific antigen in the early detection of prostate cancer: results of a multicenter clinical trial of 6,630 men. J Urol 1994;151:1283–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Garmo H, Rider JR, Taari K, Busch C, et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2014;370:932–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Catalona WJ, Partin AW, Sanda MG, Wei JT, Klee GG, Bangma CH, et al. A multicenter study of [-2]pro-prostate specific antigen combined with prostate specific antigen and free prostate specific antigen for prostate cancer detection in the 2.0 to 10.0 ng/ml prostate specific antigen range. J Urol 2011;185:1650–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chiu PK, Roobol MJ, Teoh JY, Lee WM, Yip SY, Hou SM, et al. Prostate health index (PHI) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) predictive models for prostate cancer in the Chinese population and the role of digital rectal examination-estimated prostate volume. Int Urol Nephrol. 2016;48:1631–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Force USPST. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:185–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Hong Kong Life Tables 2011–2066. https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B1120016072017XXXXB0100.pdf. Accessed 01 Jan 20.

  10. Choosing Interventions that are Cost Effective (WHO-CHOICE). 2014. Available at: http://www.who.int/choice/costs/CER_levels_en. Accessed 8 May 2014.

  11. Hogendoorn W, Moll FL, Sumpio BE, Hunink MG. Clinical decision analysis and markov modeling for surgeons: an introductory overview. Ann Surg 2016;264:268–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. The Hong Kong Cancer Registry, Hospital Authority. Enquiry on Cancer Statistics [Available from: http://www3.ha.org.hk/cancereg/e_b1.asp.

  13. Teoh JYC, Hirai HW, Ho JMW, Chan FCH, Tsoi KKF, Ng CF. Global incidence of prostate cancer in developing and developed countries with changing age structures. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0221775.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bouttell J, Teoh J, Chiu PK, Chan KS, Ng CF, Heggie R, et al. Economic evaluation of the introduction of the Prostate Health Index as a rule-out test to avoid unnecessary biopsies in men with prostate specific antigen levels of 4-10 in Hong Kong. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0215279.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Heijnsdijk EA, Denham D, de Koning HJ. The cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer detection with the use of prostate health index. Value Health 2016;19:153–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nichol MB, Wu J, Huang J, Denham D, Frencher SK, Jacobsen SJ. Cost-effectiveness of Prostate Health Index for prostate cancer detection. BJU Int. 2012;110:353–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chiang CL, So TH, Lam TC, Choi HCW. Cost-effectiveness analysis of Abiraterone Acetate versus Docetaxel in the management of metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer: Hong Kong’s perspective. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020;23:108–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Choi HCW, Jit M, Leung GM, Tsui KL, Wu JT. Simultaneously characterizing the comparative economics of routine female adolescent nonavalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and assortativity of sexual mixing in Hong Kong Chinese: a modeling analysis. BMC Med. 2018;16:127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wong IO, Kuntz KM, Cowling BJ, Lam CL, Leung GM. Cost effectiveness of mammography screening for Chinese women. Cancer. 2007;110:885–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Health Medical and Research Fund – Research Fellowship Scheme 2017/18 (Reference No.: 02160047).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. S.H. Ho Urology Centre, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

    Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh, Chi-Ho Leung, Peter Ka-Fung Chiu, Chi-Hang Yee & Chi-Fai Ng

  2. The Jockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

    Maggie Haitian Wang & Martin Chi-Sang Wong

Authors
  1. Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chi-Ho Leung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maggie Haitian Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Peter Ka-Fung Chiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chi-Hang Yee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Chi-Fai Ng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Martin Chi-Sang Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy Yuen-Chun Teoh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Teoh, J.YC., Leung, CH., Wang, M.H. et al. The cost-effectiveness of prostate health index for prostate cancer detection in Chinese men. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 23, 615–621 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-0243-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-020-0243-1

Search

Advanced search

Quick links