The cost of prostate cancer chemoprevention: A decision analysis model

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention

Volumn 15, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 1485-1489

  Svatek, Robert S ^a   Lee, J Jack ^b   Roehrborn, Claus G ^a   Lippman, Scott M ^b   Lotan, Yair ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

FINASTERIDE; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER PREVENTION; CANCER RISK; CANCER SURVIVAL; CHEMOPROPHYLAXIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; PUBLIC HEALTH;

AGED; CHEMOPREVENTION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; ENZYME INHIBITORS; FINASTERIDE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MALE; MARKOV CHAINS; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ECONOMETRIC; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33748061951     PISSN: 10559965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0221     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures, 2005.
2. Howe HL, Wingo PA, Thun MJ, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer (1973 through 1998), featuring cancers with recent increasing trends. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:824-42.
3. Thompson IM, Goodman PJ, Tangen CM, et al. The influence of finasteride on the development of prostate cancer. N Engl J Med 2003;349:215-24.
4. Treeage Pro Healthcare. Williamstown (MA): Treeage Software; 2004.
5. Andriole GL, Guess HA, Epstein JI, et al. Treatment with finasteride preserves usefulness of prostate-specific antigen in the detection of prostate cancer: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. PLESS Study Group. Proscar Long-term Efficacy and Safety Study. Urology 1998;52:195-201; discussion 201-2.
6. Yang XJ, Lecksell K, Short K, et al. Does long-term finasteride therapy affect the histologic features of benign prostatic tissue and prostate cancer on needle biopsy? PLESS Study Group. Proscar Long-Term Efficacy and Safety Study. Urology 1999;53:696-700.
7. Algaba F, Epstein JI, Aldape HC, et al. Assessment of prostate carcinoma in core needle biopsy-definition of minimal criteria for the diagnosis of cancer in biopsy material. Cancer 1996;78:376-81.
8. Kattan MW, Eastham JA, Stapleton AM, et al. A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:766-71.
9. Pound CR, Partin AW, Eisenberger MA, et al. Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA 1999;281:1591-7.
10. Thompson IM, Tangen CM, Klein EA, et al. Phase III prostate cancer prevention trials: are the costs justified? J Clin Oncol 2005;23:8161-4.
11. Bayoumi AM, Brown AD, Garber AM. Cost-effectiveness of androgen suppression therapies in advanced prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:1731-9.
12. Piper NY, Kusada L, Lance R, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the prostate: an expensive way to die. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2002;5:164-6.
13. Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, et al. Screening for prostate cancer. A decision analytic view. JAMA 1994;272:773-80.
14. Bosch JL, Hop WC, Kirkels WJ, et al. Natural history of benign prostatic hyperplasia: appropriate case definition and estimation of its prevalence in the community. Urology 1995;46:34-40.
15. Gross Domestic Product Deflator Inflation Calculator.
16. Gold MR SJ, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996:214-35.
17. Siegel JE, Torrance GW, Russell LB, et al. Guidelines for pharmacoeconomic studies. Recommendations from the panel on cost effectiveness in health and medicine. Panel on cost effectiveness in health and medicine. Pharmacoeconomics 1997;11:159-68.
18. Fleming C, Wasson JH, Albertsen PC, et al. A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team. JAMA 1993;269:2650-8.
19. Mosby: Mosby's drug consult 2005. 15th ed. Mosby; Elsevier 2005.
20. Benoit RM, Gronberg H, Naslund MJ. A quantitative analysis of the costs and benefits of prostate cancer screening. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2001;4:138-45.
21. McConnell JD, Roehrborn CG, Bautista OM, et al. The long-term effect of doxazosin, finasteride, and combination therapy on the clinical progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 2003;349:2387-98.
22. Earle CC, Chapman RH, Baker CS, et al. Systematic overview of cost-utility assessments in oncology. J Clin Oncol 2000;18:3302-17.
23. Hershman D, Sundararajan V, Jacobson JS, et al. Outcomes of tamoxifen chemoprevention for breast cancer in very high-risk women: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Clin Oncol 2002;20:9-16.
24. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, et al. Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990-1997: results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA 1998;280:1569-75.
25. Cassileth BR, Deng G. Complementary and alternative therapies for cancer. Oncologist 2004;9:80-9.
26. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:1371-88.
27. Grann VR, Sundararajan V, Jacobson JS, et al. Decision analysis of tamoxifen for the prevention of invasive breast cancer. Cancer J 2000;6:169-78.
28. Lotan Y, Cadeddu JA, Lee JJ, et al. Implications of the prostate cancer prevention trial: a decision analysis model of survival outcomes. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:1911-20.
29. Zeliadt SB, Etzioni RD, Penson DF, et al. Lifetime implications and cost-effectiveness of using finasteride to prevent prostate cancer. Am J Med 2005;118:850-7.