scholarly journals Assessing the Costs of Screening for Ovarian Cancer in the United States: An Evolving Analysis

Diagnostics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 67
Author(s):  
Justin W. Gorski ◽  
McKell Quattrone ◽  
John R. van Nagell ◽  
Edward J. Pavlik
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cost Of Care ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Screening ◽  
Total Cost ◽  
Program Costs ◽  
The Cost

The primary objective of this study is to provide an updated analysis of the cost of screening for ovarian cancer in the United States. Here, we use updated information from the University of Kentucky Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial in conjunction with new modifying factors such as U.S. national estimates of the cost of care (Truven Health MarketScan Database), recently published estimates of earnings lost due to ovarian cancer death and estimates of federal income taxes paid on those earnings. In total, 326,998 screens were performed during the Kentucky trial from 1987 to 2019. At a cost of $56 per screen, we estimate that the total base cost to operate the program over the last 32 years is $18,311,888. When accounting for the surgical cost of 381 false-positive cases, the total cost of the screening program increases by $3,030,474. However, these costs are offset by the benefit of treating more early-stage ovarian cancer in the screened population, with a total cost advantage of $4,016,475 at our institution (Kentucky) or $1,525,050 ($725,700–$3,312,650) (U.S.) nationally. Additionally, program costs are offset by approximately $3,549,000 due to the potential earnings gained by the 26 women whose lives have been saved with screening. Furthermore, the cost of the program is offset by the federal tax dollars paid on the recovered earnings and amounts to $383,292. Ultimately, the net adjusted total cost of the Kentucky screening program is an estimated $13,393,595 at our institution or $15,885,020 ($13,978,068–$16,799,083) nationally. Thus, the adjusted cost per screen is an estimated $40.96 in Kentucky or $48.58 ($42.75–$51.37) nationally.

scholarly journals Estimating Cost-effectiveness of a Multimodal Ovarian Cancer Screening Program in the United States

JAMA Oncology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haley A. Moss ◽  
Andrew Berchuck ◽  
Megan L. Neely ◽  
Evan R. Myers ◽  
Laura J. Havrilesky
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Screening ◽  
Cancer Screening Program

European/U.S. Comparison and Contrasts in Ovarian Cancer Screening and Prevention in a High-Risk Population

2017 ◽  
pp. 124-127
Author(s):  
Marian J. Mourits ◽  
G. H. de Bock
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
High Risk ◽  
The United States ◽  
High Risk Population ◽  
Genome Wide Association Studies ◽  
Hereditary Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening And Prevention

The history of screening and prevention of ovarian cancer among high-risk women in the United States and Europe is one of mutual inspiration, with researchers learning from each others’ findings and insights and collaborating with investigators from both sides of the Atlantic ocean. Examples of simultaneous and joint development of knowledge and scientific points of view include the paradigm shift from ovarian to fallopian tube high-grade serous cancer and the cessation of simultaneous adoption of ovarian cancer screening by clinicians in both the United States and Europe. Examples of joint efforts with fruitful results include international collaboration in large population-based, genome-wide association studies and in epidemiologic database studies. Research in the field of hereditary ovarian cancer is a great example of mutual inspiration and joint efforts for the purpose of improving knowledge and health care for women with hereditary ovarian cancer.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Guidance Statement: The Cost of Cancer Care

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (23) ◽  
pp. 3868-3874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neal J. Meropol ◽  
Deborah Schrag ◽  
Thomas J. Smith ◽  
Therese M. Mulvey ◽  
Robert M. Langdon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Clinical Oncology ◽  
Cancer Care ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cost Of Care ◽  
High Quality ◽  
American Society ◽  
The Cost

Advances in early detection, prevention, and treatment have resulted in consistently falling cancer death rates in the United States. In parallel with these advances have come significant increases in the cost of cancer care. It is well established that the cost of health care (including cancer care) in the United States is growing more rapidly than the overall economy. In part, this is a result of the prices and rapid uptake of new agents and other technologies, including advances in imaging and therapeutic radiology. Conventional understanding suggests that high prices may reflect the costs and risks associated with the development, production, and marketing of new drugs and technologies, many of which are valued highly by physicians, patients, and payers. The increasing cost of cancer care impacts many stakeholders who play a role in a complex health care system. Our patients are the most vulnerable because they often experience uneven insurance coverage, leading to financial strain or even ruin. Other key groups include pharmaceutical manufacturers that pass along research, development, and marketing costs to the consumer; providers of cancer care who dispense increasingly expensive drugs and technologies; and the insurance industry, which ultimately passes costs to consumers. Increasingly, the economic burden of health care in general, and high-quality cancer care in particular, will be less and less affordable for an increasing number of Americans unless steps are taken to curb current trends. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) is committed to improving cancer prevention, diagnosis, and treatment and eliminating disparities in cancer care through support of evidence-based and cost-effective practices. To address this goal, ASCO established a Cost of Care Task Force, which has developed this Guidance Statement on the Cost of Cancer Care. This Guidance Statement provides a concise overview of the economic issues facing stakeholders in the cancer community. It also recommends that the following steps be taken to address immediate needs: recognition that patient-physician discussions regarding the cost of care are an important component of high-quality care; the design of educational and support tools for oncology providers to promote effective communication about costs with patients; and the development of resources to help educate patients about the high cost of cancer care to help guide their decision making regarding treatment options. Looking to the future, this Guidance Statement also recommends that ASCO develop policy positions to address the underlying factors contributing to the increased cost of cancer care. Doing so will require a clear understanding of the factors that drive these costs, as well as potential modifications to the current cancer care system to ensure that all Americans have access to high-quality, cost-effective care.

Abstract TP423: Trends of Hospitalization Cost of Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage in the United States

Stroke ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumul Modi ◽  
Kavit Shah ◽  
Muhammad Affan ◽  
Rizwan Tahir ◽  
Panayiotis Varelas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ◽  
Respiratory Failure ◽  
Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Male Gender ◽  
Cost Of Care ◽  
Hospitalization Cost ◽  
The Cost

Background: Recent large scale studies describing the trends of hospitalization cost secondary to aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) in the United States are lacking. We performed this study to discover these trends and the factors affecting the cost of hospitalization. Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project from year 2002 to 2013 was searched for patients with a primary diagnosis of subarachnoid hemorrhage International Classification of Diseases - Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code 430) who underwent either clipping or coiling of an aneurysm. Patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage, arteriovenous malformation, arteriovenous fistula, cost of care ≤ 0, discharge to another hospital, and any missing variables were excluded. The cost of hospitalization was calculated using total charge and cost-to-charge ratio provided by HCUP, and then was adjusted for inflation (for the year 2016) utilizing the Consumer Price Index inflation calculator. Univariate and multivariable linear regression analysis was performed on selected variables to identify the factors associated with a higher cost of care. The multivariable model was adjusted for calendar year, medical comorbidities (using the Charlson Comorbidity Index), hospital location (urban or rural) and hospital teaching status (teaching or non-teaching). Results: We identified 20,905 patients with aSAH over the course of the 12 years. The mean and the median costs of hospitalization were $80,859 and $66,274, respectively. The median cost increased from $53,697 in 2002 to $73,901 in 2013 (p<0.001). Cost was also noted to increase by $2690 with the male gender, $18,877 with the presence of an acute ischemic stroke, $33,942 with the presence of respiratory failure and $18,464 with the requirement of ventriculostomy (all p<0.001). Every decade increase in age was associated with $3022 reduction in the cost (P<0.001). Conclusion: Among the factors we studied, higher hospitalization cost was independently associated with the male gender and the presence of ischemic stroke, respiratory failure and the requirement of ventriculostomy. Older age was associated with a lower hospitalization cost.

scholarly journals Costs of medical care for mesothelioma

Rare Tumors ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 203636131986349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Borrelli ◽  
Zachary Babcock ◽  
Stephen Kogut
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Medical Care ◽  
Medical Cost ◽  
The United States ◽  
Healthcare Research ◽  
Cost Of Care ◽  
Discharge Data ◽  
System A ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Mean Cost

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare and devastating form of cancer with an increasing economic burden. We sought to describe the direct cost burden of mesothelioma to the US health system. A systematic literature review was performed to locate published estimates of the medical cost of mesothelioma. In addition, we performed an analysis of hospital discharge data from the National Inpatient Sample, Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. We also reviewed publicly available legal settlements. We found that published estimates of the cost of medical care for mesothelioma are sparse, and differ with respect to nation, timeframe, and types of cost included. For the year 2014 in the United States, we estimated a mean cost per mesothelioma hospitalization of US$24,124 (95% confidence interval: US$20,819–US$28,983) and a total cost for hospital care of US$44,214,835. In conclusion, we found that reports describing the direct medical cost of care for mesothelioma in the United States are lacking, yet the per-patient cost of care is substantial, as evidenced by analyses of inpatient care and legal settlements.

Neuroblastoma: The Case for Screening Infants in North America

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 79 (6) ◽  
pp. 869-873
Author(s):  
William G. Woods ◽  
Mendel Tuchman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mass Screening ◽  
Homovanillic Acid ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Early Age ◽  
Vanillylmandelic Acid ◽  
Childhood Diseases ◽  
High Incidence

Neuroblastoma is a disease in which easily measured tumor markers are excreted. It is curable when diagnosed in an early stage and at an early age, and it has a high incidence relative to other serious childhood diseases. Recent advances in screening infants for neuroblastoma by detection of urinary homovanillic acid and vanillylmandelic acid, the most useful markers of neuroblastoma, are described. Based on results from Japan's mass-screening program and on the authors' observations, it is estimated that mass screening for neuroblastoma could save 260 lives annually in the United States.

The financial impact of fractionation scheme and treatment planning method for rectal cancer in the United States.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6518-6518
Author(s):  
Assaf Moore ◽  
Robert Benjamin Den ◽  
Noa Gordon ◽  
Michal Sarfaty ◽  
Yulia Kundel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
The United States ◽  
Planning Method ◽  
Total Cost ◽  
The Us ◽  
Fractionation Scheme ◽  
The Cost

6518 Background: Preoperative long-course chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and short-course radiotherapy (SCR) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) were found to have equivalent outcomes in three randomized trials. SCR may have lower acute toxicity and the down-staging following CRT is more well-established. At present, SCR is frequently used in Europe but has not been widely adopted in the United States (US). It is standard to deliver radiotherapy by 3D planning, while the use of Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) is controversial. In recent years there has been an increasing focus on understanding the cost and value of cancer care. In this study we aimed to assess the economic impact of fractionation scheme and treatment planning method for payers in the US. Methods: We performed a population-based analysis of the total cost of radiotherapy for LARC in the US annually. The national annual target population of patients was calculated using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Treatment costs for various fractionation schemes were based on billing codes and 2018 pricing by Medicare's Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS). The cost of chemotherapy was based on the Payment Allowance Limits for Medicare Part B Drugs by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Results: We estimate that 12,945 patients with LARC are treated with radiotherapy annually in the US. The cost of CRT with 3-D or IMRT is US$ 15,881.76 and US$ 23,744.82 per patient, respectively. With 3-D SCR the cost is US$ 5,457 per patient. The use of SCR would lead to 64-77% annual savings of US$ 125,701,387 - US$ 236,727,934 in the US compared with 3-D and IMRT based CRT, respectively. IMRT based planning increases the total cost of CRT by 49% and if adopted widely would lead to an excess cost of US$ 101,787,312 annually. Conclusions: SCR may have the potential to save in the region of US$ 0.12-0.23 billion annually in the US, likely without impacting outcomes. Lack of evidence showing benefit with costly IMRT should limit its use to clinical trials. SCR may also lead to lower personal financial toxicity. It would be reasonable for public and private payers to consider which type of radiation is most suited to reimbursement.

scholarly journals Reining In Patent Costs

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (08) ◽  
pp. 36-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirk Teska
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Average Cost ◽  
Patent Application ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fixed Cost ◽  
Total Cost ◽  
Patent Attorney ◽  
Utility Patent ◽  
Basic Patent ◽  
The Cost

This paper focuses on that one can make a fortune if one holds a patent for something that everybody wants; and when one is rich and the patent expires, then in general, the society can benefit from what one invented. According a 2007 survey, the average cost for a utility patent application in the United States is around $12,000. By the time the patent is granted, the total cost could easily exceed $20,000. As for basic patent application drafting information, provide any information that the attorney will need to set the deadline for filing the application. List the names, residential addresses, and citizenship of all the likely inventors. List and provide a copy of all relevant prior papers and patents you know about that are related to the invention. Many companies use “invention disclosure” forms for these purposes. If the patent attorney is willing, ask for a discount for multiple applications and/or fixed cost applications. The overall cost may not be that much lower, but at least the cost is known ahead of time and can budget the patenting efforts accordingly.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document