Cost comparison between watchful waiting with active surveillance and active treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer

Urology

Volumn 76, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 703-707

  Corcoran, Anthony T ^a   Peele, Pamela B ^b   Benoit, Ronald M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISEASE SURVEILLANCE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; WATCHFUL WAITING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST; ECONOMICS; HEALTH SURVEY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK FACTOR;

COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; HUMANS; MALE; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 79956354609     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.071     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. P.C. Albertsen, J.A. Hanley, and J. Fine 20-Year outcomes following conservative management of clinically localized prostate cancer J Am Med Assoc 293 2005 2095 2101 (Pubitemid 40617061)
2. J.I. Epstein, P.C. Walsh, M. Carmichael, and C.B. Brendler Pathologic and clinical findings to predict tumor extent of nonpalpable (stage T1c) prostate cancer J Am Med Assoc 271 1994 368 374
3. J.E. Johansson, O. Andren, and S.O. Andersson Natural history of early, localized prostate cancer J Am Med Assoc 291 2004 2713 2719
4. R. Choo, L. Klotz, and C. Danjoux Feasibility study: Watchful waiting for localized low to intermediate grade prostate carcinoma with selective delayed intervention based on prostate specific antigen, histological and/or clinical progression J Urol 167 2002 1664 1669
5. H.B. Carter, P.C. Walsh, P. Landis, and J.I. Epstein Expectant management of nonpalpable prostate cancer with curative intent: Preliminary results J Urol 167 2002 1231 1234
6. R.M. Benoit, H. Gronberg, and M.J. Naslund A quantitative analysis of the costs and benefits of prostate cancer screening Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 4 2001 138 145
7. G.L. Andriole, E.D. Crawford, and R.L. Grubb 3rd Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial N Engl J Med 360 2009 1310 1319
8. B. Djavan, M. Waldert, and A. Zlotta Safety and morbidity of first and repeat transrectal ultrasound guided prostate needle biopsies: Results of a prospective European prostate cancer detection study J Urol 166 2001 856 860
9. M.A. Dall'Era, B.R. Konety, and J.E. Cowan Active surveillance for the management of prostate cancer in a contemporary cohort Cancer 112 2008 2664 2670
10. M.S. Soloway, C.T. Soloway, and S. Williams Active surveillance; a reasonable management alternative for patients with prostate cancer: The Miami experience BJU Int 101 2008 165 169
11. D.A. Barocas, J.E. Cowan, J.A. Smith Jr., and P.R. Carroll What percentage of patients with newly diagnosed carcinoma of the prostate are candidates for surveillance? An analysis of the CaPSURE database J Urol 180 2008 1330 1334 discussion 1334-1335
12. L.A. Klotz, A. Mladenov, G. Morton, and A. Loblaw Clinical results of long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort Can Urol Assoc J 3 2009 S132 S176
13. S. Roemeling, M.J. Roobol, and S.H. de Vries Active surveillance for prostate cancers detected in three subsequent rounds of a screening trial: Characteristics, PSA doubling times, and outcome Eur Urol 2007 1244-125051, discussion 1251
14. M.A. Dall'Era, M.R. Cooperberg, and J.M. Chan Active surveillance for early-stage prostate cancer: Review of the current literature Cancer 112 2008 1650 1659
15. J.I. Epstein, and S.R. Potter The pathological interpretation and significance of prostate needle biopsy findings: Implications and current controversies J Urol 166 2001 402 410
16. S. Loeb, and W.J. Catalona Prostate-specific antigen in clinical practice Cancer Lett 249 2007 30 39
17. A. Magheli, S. Rais-Bahrami, and B.J. Trock Prostate specific antigen versus prostate specific antigen density as a prognosticator of pathological characteristics and biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy J Urol 179 2008 1780 1784 discussion 1784
18. S.J. Freedland, W.J. Aronson, and M.K. Terris Percent of prostate needle biopsy cores with cancer is significant independent predictor of prostate specific antigen recurrence following radical prostatectomy: Results from SEARCH database J Urol 169 2003 2136 2141
19. M.R. Cooperberg, J.M. Broering, and P.R. Carroll Risk assessment for prostate cancer metastasis and mortality at the time of diagnosis J Natl Cancer Inst 101 2009 878 887
20. L.S. Wilson, R. Tesoro, and E.P. Elkin Cumulative cost pattern comparison of prostate cancer treatments Cancer 109 2007 518 527
21. Y. Lotan, J.A. Cadeddu, and M.T. Gettman The new economics of radical prostatectomy: Cost comparison of open, laparoscopic and robot assisted techniques J Urol 172 2004 1431 1435
22. M.A. Dall'Era, and P.R. Carroll Outcomes and follow-up strategies for patients on active surveillance Curr Opin Urol 19 2009 258 262
23. L. Klotz Active surveillance for favorable risk prostate cancer: Rationale, risks, and results Urol Oncol 25 2007 505 509
24. C. Warlick, B.J. Trock, and P. Landis Delayed versus immediate surgical intervention and prostate cancer outcome J Natl Cancer Inst 98 2006 355 357