Health economics evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging for the staging of prostate cancer for Austria and Germany;Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluation der Magnet-resonanzbildgebung im Staging von Prostata-karzinomen für Österreich und Deutschland

RoFo Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Rontgenstrahlen und der Bildgebenden Verfahren

Volumn 184, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 556-564

  Stadlbauer, A ^a,b   Bernt, R ^c   Salomonowitz, E ^a   Plas, E ^c   Strunk, G ^d   Eberhardt, K ^e  

^a Karl Landsteiner Institute for Implementation of Innovative Techniques in Cardiac Surgery   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^c HANUSCH HOSPITAL   (Austria)

^d TU DORTMUND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^e Krankenhaus Schloss Werneck   (Germany)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness; health policy and practice; prostate

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUSTRIA; CANCER HORMONE THERAPY; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; GERMANY; HEALTH ECONOMICS; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATE CARCINOMA; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

AGED; AUSTRIA; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; GERMANY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PILOT PROJECTS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROGNOSIS; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84861530220     PISSN: 14389029     EISSN: 14389010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1299448     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Robert Koch-Institut, Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland Krebs in Deutschland 2005/2006. Häufigkeiten und Trends. Berlin Robert Koch-Institut (RKI) und Gesellschaft der epidemiologischen Krebsregister in Deutschland e. V: 2010
2. Statistik Austria Krebsinzidenz und Krebsmortalität in Österreich. Wien Bundesanstalt Statistik Österreich: 2010
3. Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland Statistisches Jahrbuch 2010. Wiesbaden Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland: 2010
4. Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland Gesundheit: Todesursachen in Deutschland. Wiesbaden Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland: 2010
5. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie Interdisziplinäre Leitlinie der Qualität S3 zur Früherkennung, Diagnose und Therapie der verschiedenen Stadien des Prostatakarzinoms. Düsseldorf Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie (e. V.): 2009
6. Briganti A, Chun FK, Salonia A et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting the probability of lymph node invasion based on the extent of pelvic lymphadenectomy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. BJU Int: 2006; 98 788 793 (Pubitemid 44368026)
7. Humphrey PA. Gleason grading and prognostic factors in carcinoma of the prostate. Mod Pathol: 2004; 17 292 306 (Pubitemid 41646608)
8. Cookson MS, Fleshner NE, Soloway SM et al. Correlation between Gleason score of needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy specimen: accuracy and clinical implications. J Urol: 1997; 157 559 562 (Pubitemid 27026838)
9. Shen BY, Tsui KH, Chang PL et al. Correlation between the Gleason scores of needle biopsies and radical prostatectomy specimens. Chang Gung Med J: 2003; 26 919 924
10. Chun FK, Karakiewicz PI, Huland H et al. Role of nomograms for prostate cancer in 2007. World J Urol: 2007; 25 131 142
11. King CR, Long JP. Prostate biopsy grading errors: a sampling problem? Int J Cancer: 2000; 90 326 330 (Pubitemid 32049294)
12. Steinberg DM, Sauvageot J, Piantadosi S et al. Correlation of prostate needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy Gleason grade in academic and community settings. Am J Surg Pathol: 1997; 21 566 576 (Pubitemid 27213072)
13. Ahmed HU, Kirkham A, Arya M et al. Is it time to consider a role for MRI before prostate biopsy? Nat Rev Clin Oncol: 2009; 6 197 206
14. Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW et al. Prediction of organ-confined prostate cancer: incremental value of MR imaging and MR spectroscopic imaging to staging nomograms. Radiology: 2006; 238 597 603 (Pubitemid 43134372)
15. Wang L, Hricak H, Kattan MW et al. Prediction of seminal vesicle invasion in prostate cancer: incremental value of adding endorectal MR imaging to the Kattan nomogram. Radiology: 2007; 242 182 188 (Pubitemid 44956023)
16. Siebert U. Entscheidungsanalytische Modelle zur Sicherung der Übertragbarkeit internationaler Evidenz von HTA auf den Kontext des deutschen Gesundheitssystems. Berlin Deutsche Argentur für Health Technology Assessment des Deutschen Instituts für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information: 2005
17. Menn P, Holle R. Comparing three software tools for implementing markov models for health economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics: 2009; 27 745 753
18. Philips Z, Ginnelly L, Sculpher M et al. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess: 2004; 8 1 158
19. Heidenreich A, Aus G, Bolla M et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Eur Urol: 2008; 53 68 80 (Pubitemid 350166735)
20. Foley CL, Feneley MR. The clinical significance and therapeutic implications of extraprostatic invasion. Surg Oncol: 2009; 18 203 212
21. Prezioso D, Galasso R, Di Martino M et al. Role of surgery in treatment of locally advanced prostate cancer. Anticancer Res: 2006; 26 3151 3158 (Pubitemid 44161815)
22. Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW et al. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol: 2005; 58 982 990 (Pubitemid 41316441)
23. Beemsterboer PM, de Koning HJ, Birnie E et al. Advanced prostate cancer: course, care, and cost implications. Prostate: 1999; 40 97 104 (Pubitemid 29304700)
24. Burkhardt JH, Litwin MS, Rose CM et al. Comparing the costs of radiation therapy and radical prostatectomy for the initial treatment of early-stage prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol: 2002; 20 2869 2875 (Pubitemid 34651516)
25. Heuzenroeder L, Donnelly M, Haby MM et al. Cost-effectiveness of psychological and pharmacological interventions for generalized anxiety disorder and panic disorder. Aust N Z J Psychiatry: 2004; 38 602 612 (Pubitemid 39199487)
26. Langa KM, Fultz NH, Saint S et al. Informal caregiving time and costs for urinary incontinence in older individuals in the United States. J Am Geriatr Soc: 2002; 50 733 737 (Pubitemid 34298763)
27. Neumann PB, Grimmer KA, Grant RE et al. The costs and benefits of physiotherapy as first-line treatment for female stress urinary incontinence. Aust N Z J Public Health: 2005; 29 416 421 (Pubitemid 41535945)
28. Glick HA, Briggs AH, Polsky D. Quantifying stochastic uncertainty and presenting results of cost-effectiveness analyses. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res: 2001; 1 25 36 (Pubitemid 34649743)
29. Laska EM, Meisner M, Siegel C et al. Statistical determination of cost-effectiveness frontier based on net health benefits. Health Econ: 2002; 11 249 264 (Pubitemid 34284849)
30. Stinnett AA, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making: 1998; 18 68 80
31. Akin O, Sala E, Moskowitz CS et al. Transition zone prostate cancers: features, detection, localization, and staging at endorectal MR imaging. Radiology: 2006; 239 784 792 (Pubitemid 43830614)
32. Beyersdorff D, Darsow U, Stephan C et al. MRI of prostate cancer using three different coil systems: image quality, tumor detection, and staging. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2003; 175 799 805 (Pubitemid 36806763)
33. Beyersdorff D, Taymoorian K, Knosel T et al. MRI of prostate cancer at 1.5 and 3.0 T: comparison of image quality in tumor detection and staging. Am J Roentgenol: 2005; 185 1214 1220
34. Bloch BN, Furman-Haran E, Helbich TH et al. Prostate cancer: accurate determination of extracapsular extension with high-spatial-resolution dynamic contrast-enhanced and T2-weighted MR imaging - initial results. Radiology: 2007; 245 176 185 (Pubitemid 47417801)
35. Cornud F, Flam T, Chauveinc L et al. Extraprostatic spread of clinically localized prostate cancer: factors predictive of pT3 tumor and of positive endorectal MR imaging examination results. Radiology: 2002; 224 203 210 (Pubitemid 34680396)
36. Futterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ et al. Prostate cancer: comparison of local staging accuracy of pelvic phased-array coil alone versus integrated endorectal-pelvic phased-array coils. Local staging accuracy of prostate cancer using endorectal coil MR imaging. Eur Radiol: 2007; 17 1055 1065 (Pubitemid 46766887)
37. Futterer JJ, Engelbrecht MR, Huisman HJ et al. Staging prostate cancer with dynamic contrast-enhanced endorectal MR imaging prior to radical prostatectomy: experienced versus less experienced readers. Radiology: 2005; 237 541 549 (Pubitemid 41507892)
38. Graser A, Heuck A, Sommer B et al. Per-sextant localization and staging of prostate cancer: correlation of imaging findings with whole-mount step section histopathology. Am J Roentgenol: 2007; 188 84 90 (Pubitemid 46012493)
39. Heijmink SW, Futterer JJ, Hambrock T et al. Prostate cancer: body-array versus endorectal coil MR imaging at 3 T - comparison of image quality, localization, and staging performance. Radiology: 2007; 244 184 195 (Pubitemid 46981973)
40. Yoshizako T, Wada A, Hayashi T et al. Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of prostate transition-zone cancer. Acta Radiol: 2008; 49 1207 1213
41. Wetter A, Engl TA, Nadjmabadi D et al. Combined MRI and MR spectroscopy of the prostate before radical prostatectomy. Am J Roentgenol: 2006; 187 724 730 (Pubitemid 44651497)
42. Futterer JJ, Scheenen TW, Heijmink SW et al. Standardized threshold approach using three-dimensional proton magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging in prostate cancer localization of the entire prostate. Invest Radiol: 2007; 42 116 122 (Pubitemid 46104892)
43. Ogura K, Maekawa S, Okubo K et al. Dynamic endorectal magnetic resonance imaging for local staging and detection of neurovascular bundle involvement of prostate cancer: correlation with histopathologic results. Urology: 2001; 57 721 726
44. Pegios W, Bentas W, Wittmann L et al. Kernspintomographisches Staging des Prostatakarzinoms mittels kombinierter Endorektal-Body-Phased-Array-Spule und histopathologische Korrelation. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2003; 175 1660 1666 (Pubitemid 38019848)
45. Turkbey B, Pinto PA, Mani H et al. Prostate cancer: value of multiparametric MR imaging at 3 T for detection - histopathologic correlation. Radiology: 2010; 255 89 99
46. Wang L, Mullerad M, Chen HN et al. Prostate cancer: incremental value of endorectal MR imaging findings for prediction of extracapsular extension. Radiology: 2004; 232 133 139 (Pubitemid 38787828)
47. Divrik RT, Eroglu A, Sahin A et al. Increasing the number of biopsies increases the concordance of Gleason scores of needle biopsies and prostatectomy specimens. Urol Oncol: 2007; 25 376 382 (Pubitemid 47362754)
48. Loughlin KR, Prasad MM. Post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a confluence of 3 factors. J Urol: 2010; 183 871 877
49. Magheli A, Burnett AL. Erectile dysfunction following prostatectomy: prevention and treatment. Nat Rev Urol: 2009; 6 415 427
50. Pow-Sang JM, Velasquez J, Myers MD et al. Pure laparoscopic and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the management of prostate cancer. Cancer Control: 2007; 14 250 257 (Pubitemid 47057795)
51. Wilt TJ, MacDonald R, Rutks I et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and harms of treatments for clinically localized prostate cancer. Ann Intern Med: 2008; 148 435 448 (Pubitemid 351665443)
52. Hollenbeck BK, Dunn RL, Wei JT et al. Determinants of long-term sexual health outcome after radical prostatectomy measured by a validated instrument. J Urol: 2003; 169 1453 1457 (Pubitemid 36323806)
53. Hu JC, Gu X, Lipsitz SR et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. Jama: 2009; 302 1557 1564
54. Kundu SD, Roehl KA, Eggener SE et al. Potency, continence and complications in 3,477 consecutive radical retropubic prostatectomies. J Urol: 2004; 172 2227 2231 (Pubitemid 39507497)
55. Penson DF, McLerran D, Feng Z et al. 5-year urinary and sexual outcomes after radical prostatectomy: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. J Urol: 2008; 179 40 S44
56. Touijer K, Eastham JA, Secin FP et al. Comprehensive prospective comparative analysis of outcomes between open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy conducted in 2003 to 2005. J Urol: 2008; 179 1811 1817
57. Dillioglugil O, Leibman BD, Leibman NS et al. Risk factors for complications and morbidity after radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Urol: 1997; 157 1760 1767 (Pubitemid 27171769)
58. Hargreave TB, Heynes CF, Kendrick SW et al. Mortality after transurethral and open prostatectomy in Scotland. Br J Urol: 1996; 77 547 553 (Pubitemid 26130747)
59. Thorpe AC, Cleary R, Coles J et al. Deaths and complications following prostatectomy in 1400 men in the northern region of England. Northern Regional Prostate Audit Group. Br J Urol: 1994; 74 559 565 (Pubitemid 24348620)
60. Wolf AM, Wender RC, Etzioni RB et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of prostate cancer: update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin: 2010; 60 70 98
61. Grills IS, Martinez AA, Hollander M et al. High dose rate brachytherapy as prostate cancer monotherapy reduces toxicity compared to low dose rate palladium seeds. J Urol: 2004; 171 1098 1104 (Pubitemid 38327535)
62. Talcott JA, Manola J, Clark JA et al. Time course and predictors of symptoms after primary prostate cancer therapy. J Clin Oncol: 2003; 21 3979 3986 (Pubitemid 46606212)
63. Vargas C, Ghilezan M, Hollander M et al. A new model using number of needles and androgen deprivation to predict chronic urinary toxicity for high or low dose rate prostate brachytherapy. J Urol: 2005; 174 882 887 (Pubitemid 41140622)
64. Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland Lebenserwartung in Deutschland: Durchschnittliche und fernere Lebenserwartung nach ausgewählten Altersstufen. Wiesbaden Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland: 2008
65. Cowen ME, Halasyamani LK, Kattan MW. Predicting life expectancy in men with clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol: 2006; 175 99 103 (Pubitemid 41797102)
66. Tewari A, Johnson CC, Divine G et al. Long-term survival probability in men with clinically localized prostate cancer: a case-control, propensity modeling study stratified by race, age, treatment and comorbidities. J Urol: 2004; 171 1513 1519 (Pubitemid 38365408)
67. Walz J, Gallina A, Saad F et al. A nomogram predicting 10-year life expectancy in candidates for radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol: 2007; 25 3576 3581 (Pubitemid 47372594)
68. Kim HL, Puymon MR, Qin M et al. A method for using life tables to estimate lifetime risk for prostate cancer death. J Natl Compr Canc Netw: 2010; 8 148 154
69. Dale W, Basu A, Elstein A et al. Predicting utility ratings for joint health States from single health States in prostate cancer: empirical testing of 3 alternative theories. Med Decis Making: 2008; 28 102 112
70. Stewart ST, Lenert L, Bhatnagar V et al. Utilities for prostate cancer health states in men aged 60 and older. Med Care: 2005; 43 347 355 (Pubitemid 40515624)
71. Smith DS, Krygiel J, Nease RF Jr et al. Patient preferences for outcomes associated with surgical management of prostate cancer. J Urol: 2002; 167 2117 2122 (Pubitemid 34309678)
72. Wetter A, Ajdukovic AN, Fliessbach K et al. Staging des Prostatakarzinoms:Wertigkeit der kombinierten Information aus endorektaler MRT, bioptischem Gleason Score und präoperativem PSA-Wert. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2006; 178 385 390
73. Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, Laheij RJ et al. Local staging of prostate cancer using magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol: 2002; 12 2294 2302 (Pubitemid 36940327)
74. Engelbrecht MR, Jager GJ, Severens JL. Patient selection for magnetic resonance imaging of prostate cancer. Eur Urol: 2001; 40 300 307 (Pubitemid 34701900)
75. Jager GJ, Severens JL, Thornbury JR et al. Prostate cancer staging: should MR imaging be used? A decision analytic approach. Radiology: 2000; 215 445 451 (Pubitemid 30237843)
76. Villers A, Lemaitre L, Haffner J et al. Current status of MRI for the diagnosis, staging and prognosis of prostate cancer: implications for focal therapy and active surveillance. Curr Opin Urol: 2009; 19 274 282
77. Huppertz A, Schmidt M, Wagner M et al. Whole-body MR imaging versus sequential multimodal diagnostic algorithm for staging patients with rectal cancer: cost analysis. Fortschr Röntgenstr: 2010; 182 793 802