Primer: Using decision analysis to improve clinical decision making in urology

Nature Clinical Practice Urology

Volumn 3, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 439-448

  Elkin, Elena B ^a   Vickers, Andrew J ^a   Kattan, Michael ^b  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIANDROGEN; FINASTERIDE; GONADORELIN AGONIST;

CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPLICATION; DECISION THEORY; DISEASE COURSE; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; PROSTATE CANCER; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SCREENING TEST; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SURVIVAL; THERAPY EFFECT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TREATMENT PLANNING; UNCERTAINTY; UROLOGY;

DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; UROLOGY;

EID: 33747171381     PISSN: 17434270     EISSN: 17434289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncpuro0556     Document Type: Review

References (68)

1. Hunink M et al. (2001) Decision-Making in Health and Medicine: Integrating Evidence and Values. New York: Cambridge University Press
2. Lotan Y et al. (2005) Implications of the prostate cancer prevention trial: A decision analysis model of survival outcomes. J Clin Oncol 23: 1911-1920
3. Zeliadt SB et al. (2005) Lifetime implications and cost-effectiveness of using finasteride to prevent prostate cancer. Am J Med 118: 850-857
4. Krahn MD et al. (1994) Screening for prostate cancer. A decision analytic view. JAMA 272: 773-780
5. Cantor SB et al. (1995) Prostate cancer screening: A decision analysis. J Fam Pract 41: 33-41
6. Wolf JS Jr et al. (1995) The use and accuracy of cross-sectional imaging and fine needle aspiration cytology for detection of pelvic lymph node metastases before radical prostatectomy. J Urol 153: 993-999
7. Jager GJ et al. (2000) Prostate cancer staging: Should MR imaging be used? - A decision analytic approach. Radiology 215: 445-451
8. Fleming C et al. (1993) A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team. JAMA 269: 2650-2658
9. Beck JR et al. (1994) A critique of the decision analysis for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol 152: 1894-1899
10. Kattan MW et al. (1997) A decision analysis for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. J Gen Intern Med 12: 299-305
11. Saranchuk JW et al. (2005) Achieving optimal outcomes after radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 23: 4146-4151
12. Meng MV and Carroll PR (2000) When is pelvic lymph node dissection necessary before radical prostatectomy? A decision analysis. J Urol 164: 1235-1240
13. Konski A et al. (2005) Economic analysis of a phase III clinical trial evaluating the addition of total androgen suppression to radiation versus radiation alone for locally advanced prostate cancer (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 86-10). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 63: 788-794
14. Konski A et al. (2006) Long-term hormone therapy and radiation is cost-effective for patients with locally advanced prostate carcinoma. Cancer 106: 51-57
15. Hillner BE et al. (1995) Estimating the cost effectiveness of total androgen blockade with flutamide in M1 prostate cancer. Urology 45: 633-640
16. Bayoumi AM et al. (2000) Cost-effectiveness of androgen suppression therapies in advanced prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 92: 1731-1739
17. Penson DF et al. (2005) The cost-effectiveness of combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide and luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonist in men with metastatic prostate cancer. J Urol 174: 547-552
18. Ramsey S et al. (2005) Is combined androgen blockade with bicalutamide cost-effective compared with combined androgen blockade with flutamide? Urology 66: 835-839
19. Konski A (2004) Radiotherapy is a cost-effective palliative treatment for patients with bone metastasis from prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 60: 1373-1378
20. Lawler FH et al. (1991) Circumcision: A decision analysis of its medical value. Fam Med 23: 587-593
21. Barry MJ et al. (1988) Watchful waiting vs immediate transurethral resection for symptomatic prostatism. The importance of patients' preferences. JAMA 259: 3010-3017
22. Lowe FC et al. (1995) Economic modeling to assess the costs of treatment with finasteride, terazosin, and transurethral resection of the prostate for men with moderate to severe symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urology 46: 477-483
23. Blute M et al. (2000) Cost effectiveness of microwave thermotherapy in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: Part II - results. Urology 56: 981-987
24. Manyak MJ et al. (2002) Cost effectiveness of treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: An economic model for comparison of medical, minimally invasive, and surgical therapy. J Endourol 16: 51-56
25. McDonald H et al. (2004) An economic evaluation of doxazosin, finasteride and combination therapy in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia. Can J Urol 11: 2327-2340
26. DiSantostefano RL et al. (2006) The long-term cost effectiveness of treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia. Pharmacoeconomics 24: 171-191
27. Noe L et al. (2002) A pharmacoeconomic model comparing two long-acting treatments for overactive bladder. J Manag Care Pharm 8: 343-352
28. Kiemeney LA et al. (1994) Should random urothelial biopsies be taken from patients with primary superficial bladder cancer? A decision analysis. Members of the Dutch South-East Co-Operative Urological Group. Br J Urol 73: 164-171
29. Lachaine J et al. (2000) Economic evaluation of NMP22 in the management of bladder cancer. Can J Urol 7: 974-980
30. Nam RK et al. (2000) Comparison of molecular and conventional strategies for followup of superficial bladder cancer using decision analysis. J Urol 163: 752-757
31. Lotan Y and Roehrborn CG (2002) Cost-effectiveness of a modified care protocol substituting bladder tumor markers for cystoscopy for the followup of patients with transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder: A decision analytical approach. J Urol 167: 75-79
32. Munro AJ and Warde PR (1991) The use of a Markov process to simulate and assess follow-up policies for patients with malignant disease: surveillance for stage 1 nonseminomatous tumors of the testis. Med Decis Making 11: 131-139
33. Link RE et al. (2005) Modeling the cost of management options for stage I nonseminomatous germ cell tumors: A decision tree analysis. J Clin Oncol 23: 5762-5773
34. Spermon JR et al. (2005) The efficacy of different follow-up strategies in clinical stage I Non-seminomatous Germ Cell Cancer: A Markov simulation study. Eur Urol 48: 258-267
35. Torrance GW et al. (2001) Visual analog scales: Do they have a role in the measurement of preferences for health states? Med Decis Making 21: 329-334
36. Feeny D et al. (1995) Multi-attribute health status classification systems. Health Utilities Index. Pharmacoeconomics 7: 490-502
37. Kaplan RM and Anderson JP (1988) A general health policy model: Update and applications. Health Serv Res 23: 203-235
38. Dolan P (1997) Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 35: 1095-1108
39. Chapman GB et al. (1999) A multi-attribute model of prostate cancer patients' preferences for health states. Qual Life Res 8: 171-180
40. Saigal CS et al. (2001) Predictors of utilities for health states in early stage prostate cancer. J Urol 166: 942-946
41. Smith DS et al. (2002) Patient preferences for outcomes associated with surgical management of prostate cancer. J Urol 167: 2117-2122
42. Krahn M et al. (2003) Patient and community preferences for outcomes in prostate cancer: Implications for clinical policy. Med Care 41: 153-164
43. Volk RJ et al. (2004) Preferences of husbands and wives for outcomes of prostate cancer screening and treatment. J Gen Intern Med 19: 339-348
44. Stewart ST et al. (2005) Utilities for prostate cancer health states in men aged 60 and older. Med Care 43: 347-355
45. Giesler RB et al. (1999) Assessing the performance of utility techniques in the absence of a gold standard. Med Care 37: 580-588
46. Souchek J et al. (2000) A trial for comparing methods for eliciting treatment preferences from men with advanced prostate cancer: Results from the initial visit. Med Care 38: 1040-1050
47. Chapman GB et al. (1998) Prostate cancer patients' utilities for health states: How it looks depends on where you stand. Med Decis Making 18: 278-286
48. Elstein AS et al. (2005) Patients' values and clinical substituted judgments: The case of localized prostate cancer. Health Psychol 24 (Suppl 4): S85-S92
49. Tengs TO and Wallace A (2000) One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates. Med Care 38: 583-637
50. Bell CM et al. (2001) An off-the-shelf help list: A comprehensive catalog of preference scores from published cost-utility analyses. Med Decis Making 21: 288-294
51. Smith JA Jr et al. (1999) Bladder cancer clinical guidelines panel summary report on the management of nonmuscle invasive bladder cancer (stages Ta, T1 and TIS). The American Urological Association. J Urol 162: 1697-1701
52. Sonnenberg FA and Beck JR (1993) Markov models in medical decision-making: A practical guide. Med Decis Making 13: 322-338
53. Cowen ME et al. (1998) The danger of applying group-level utilities in decision analyses of the treatment of localized prostate cancer in individual patients. Med Decis Making 18: 376-380
54. Weinstein MC et al. (1996) Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA 276: 1253-1258
55. Russell LB et al. (1996) The role of cost-effectiveness analysis in health and medicine. JAMA 276: 1172-1177
56. Welch HG et al. (2005) Prostate-specific antigen levels in the United States: Implications of various definitions for abnormal. J Natl Cancer Inst 97: 1132-1137
57. Permpongkosol S et al. (2005) Long-term survival analysis after laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J Urol 174: 1222-1225
58. Stolzenburg JU et al. (2005) Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy: Oncological and functional results after 700 procedures. J Urol 174: 1271-1275
59. Griffiths CJ et al. (2005) A nomogram to classify men with lower urinary tract symptoms using urine flow and noninvasive measurement of bladder pressure. J Urol 174: 1323-1326
60. Sorbellini M et al. (2005) A postoperative prognostic nomogram predicting recurrence for patients with conventional clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 173: 48-51
61. Kattan MW et al. (1999) Postoperative nomogram for disease recurrence after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 17: 1499-1507
62. Stapleton AMF and Pinnock CB (2005) Nomograms for prostate cancer - is their use evidence based? Nat Clin Pract Urol 2: 462-463
63. Zlotta AR et al. (2004) Is seminal vesicle ablation mandatory for all patients undergoing radical prostatectomy? A multivariate analysis on 1283 patients. Eur Urol 46: 42-49
64. Elkin EB et al. (2004) Preference assessment method affects decision-analytic recommendations: A prostate cancer treatment example. Med Decis Making 24: 504-510
65. O'Connor AM et al. (2003) Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Art. No CD001431
66. Volk RJ and Spann SJ (2000) Decision-aids for prostate cancer screening. J Fam Pract 49: 425-427
67. Barry MJ (2002) Health decision aids to facilitate shared decision making in office practice. Ann Intern Med 136: 127-135
68. Dowding D et al. (2004) The development and preliminary evaluation of a decision aid based on decision analysis for two treatment conditions: benign prostatic hyperplasia and hypertension. Patient Educ Counsel 52: 209-215