Faculty Opinions recommendation of Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging and targeted fusion biopsy for early detection of prostate cancer.

Author(s):  
Ardeshir Rastinehad
2018 ◽  
Vol 122 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine L. Barnett ◽  
Matthew S. Davenport ◽  
Jeffrey S. Montgomery ◽  
John T. Wei ◽  
James E. Montie ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 25-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Ingham ◽  
Matthew Mossanen ◽  
Ye Wang ◽  
Steven Lee Chang

25 Background: We sought to determine if the reported improved performance of magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound (MRI-US) fusion biopsy over systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS) in the detection of prostate cancer justifies the added cost of the MR imaging. Methods: A decision-analytic Markov model with a lifetime horizon of 10 years was developed to evaluate diagnostic accuracy, long-term health outcomes, costs, and quality-of-life of two strategies (i.e., TRUS versus MRI-US fusion biopsy [prostate MRI followed potentially by MRI-US fusion biopsy]) as the initial diagnostic test in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen ( > 4 ng/ml) without prior evaluation. Probabilities of clinical events were obtained from published literature. Direct medical costs, including diagnostic and treatment-related costs, were derived from the Premier Hospital Database. Costs were inflated to 2015 US dollars and discounted at an annual rate of 3%. Health outcomes were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), which were determined based on published literature and expert opinion. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and performed sensitivity analyses to assess uncertainty. Results: The MRI-US fusion biopsy strategy yielded a lower average discounted cost ($5,358 versus $6,372) and higher total QALYs-gained (7.21 versus 7.19) than TRUS. The reduced expenditures associated with MRI-US fusion biopsy was primarily due to avoiding intervention for clinically insignificant prostate cancer. The results were robust with the sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: For men in the United States with an elevated PSA, the use of MRI-US fusion biopsy in the evaluation for prostate cancer represents a greater value than TRUS, the standard of care option. Widespread adoption of MRI-US fusion biopsy may serve to reduce the economic burden of prostate cancer.


2021 ◽  
pp. 205141582110237
Author(s):  
Enrico Checcucci ◽  
Sabrina De Cillis ◽  
Daniele Amparore ◽  
Diletta Garrou ◽  
Roberta Aimar ◽  
...  

Objectives: To determine if standard biopsy still has a role in the detection of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer in biopsy-naive patients with positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging. Materials and methods: We extracted, from our prospective maintained fusion biopsy database, patients from March 2014 to December 2018. The detection rate of prostate cancer and clinically significant prostate cancer and complication rate were analysed in a cohort of patients who underwent fusion biopsy alone (group A) or fusion biopsy plus standard biopsy (group B). The International Society of Urological Pathology grade group determined on prostate biopsy with the grade group determined on final pathology among patients who underwent radical prostatectomy were compared. Results: Prostate cancer was found in 249/389 (64.01%) and 215/337 (63.8%) patients in groups A and B, respectively ( P=0.98), while the clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate was 57.8% and 55.1% ( P=0.52). No significant differences in complications were found. No differences in the upgrading rate between biopsy and final pathology finding after radical prostatectomy were recorded. Conclusions: In biopsy-naive patients, with suspected prostate cancer and positive multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging the addition of standard biopsy to fusion biopsy did not increase significantly the detection rate of prostate cancer or clinically significant prostate cancer. Moreover, the rate of upgrading of the cancer grade group between biopsy and final pathology was not affected by the addition of standard biopsy. Level of evidence: Not applicable for this multicentre audit.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-93
Author(s):  
R.A. Romanov ◽  
◽  
A.V. Koryakin ◽  
A.V. Sivkov ◽  
B.Ya. Alekseev ◽  
...  

Introduction. Significant improvement in the quality of visualization of the prostate using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as the development of technologies for virtual combination of MRI and ultrasound images opens new horizons in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. The introduction of the PI-RADS system has allowed the standardization of MRI findings, and the development of fusion biopsy systems seeks to make diagnostics more accurate and less operator-dependent. Materials and methods. In this literature review, we evaluate the effectiveness of various biopsy approaches and discuss the prospects for targeted biopsies. The search for publications was carried out in the databases PubMed, e-library, Web of Scince et al. For citation, 55 literature sources were selected that met the search criteria for the keywords, «prostate cancer», «biopsy», «MRI», «TRUS», «fusion». Results. Diagnosis of prostate cancer using MRI. Modern technologies for radiological diagnosis of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are based on the standardized PI-RADS protocol, using different modes (T2, diffusion-weighted images and contrast enhancement), which provides the best visualization of tumor-suspicious nodes in the prostate gland, allowing determination of lesion localization and size for subsequent targeted biopsy. Options for performing a prostate biopsy to diagnose prostate cancer. A description of the methods and effectiveness of transrectal and transperineal biopsy under ultrasound guidance is carried out - due to the fact that ultrasound diagnostics of prostate cancer has a rather low sensitivity due to small differences in the ultrasound structure of normal and tumor tissue of the prostate, an extended template biopsy technique was proposed, which involves puncture of the prostate through a special lattice. It also describes the technology of fusion biopsy and also provides literature data comparing the diagnostic accuracy of standard TRUS and fusion prostate biopsy, as well as the importance of transrectal / transperineal access. Questions for further study. Given the desire to reduce the number of biopsies while maintaining or even increasing the accuracy of diagnosing prostate cancer, data from studies investigating the feasibility of combining polyfocal (non-targeted) and targeted (targeted) biopsies are presented. Conclusion. The existing methods of non-targeted biopsy (polyfocal, saturation, template) and targeted (fusion biopsy) have their advantages and disadvantages, which currently do not allow making certain recommendations for their use, but a significant number of authors prefer MRI-as sisted, fusion -biopsy.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuang Hao ◽  
Emelie Heintz ◽  
Ellinor Östensson ◽  
Andrea Discacciati ◽  
Fredrik Jäderling ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveAssess the cost-effectiveness of no screening and quadrennial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based screening for prostate cancer using either Stockholm3 or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test as a reflex test.MethodsTest characteristics were estimated from the STHLM3-MR study (NCT03377881). A cost-utility analysis was conducted from a lifetime societal perspective using a microsimulation model for men aged 55-69 in Sweden for no screening and three quadrennial screening strategies, including: PSA≥3ng/mL; and Stockholm3 with reflex test thresholds of PSA≥1.5 and 2ng/mL. Men with a positive test had an MRI, and those MRI positive had combined targeted and systematic biopsies. Predictions included the number of tests, cancer incidence and mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Uncertainties in key parameters were assessed using sensitivity analyses.ResultsCompared with no screening, the screening strategies were predicted to reduce prostate cancer deaths by 7-9% across a lifetime and were considered to be moderate costs per QALY gained in Sweden. Using Stockholm3 with a reflex threshold of PSA≥2ng/mL resulted in a 60% reduction in MRI compared with screening using PSA. This Stockholm3 strategy was cost-effective with a probability of 70% at a cost-effectiveness threshold of €47,218 (500,000 SEK).ConclusionsAll screening strategies were considered to be moderate costs per QALY gained compared with no screening. Screening with Stockholm3 test at a reflex threshold of PSA≥2ng/mL and MRI was predicted to be cost-effective in Sweden. Use of the Stockholm3 test may reduce screening-related harms and costs while maintaining the health benefits from early detection.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document