Comparative Economic Evaluation of Radical Prostatectomy, Radiation, and Ablative Techniques in the Management of Localized Prostate Cancer.

Background

To compare the costs of open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP), intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), low-dose brachytherapy (LDBT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), cryotherapy (Cryo), and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) for low/intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa), from the healthcare system perspective.

Methods

This retrospective, IRB-approved study compared the costs and charges of primary treatment options for localized PCa at Duke University Hospital between January 2018 and December 2019. We identified cases by querying the relevant disease, procedural, and charge codes from Duke Finance. Consecutive cases with NCCN high-risk disease, prior treatment, or missing institutional financial information were excluded. Costs were calculated from the point at which the treatment option was selected until the last treatment session (SBRT and IMRT) or hospital discharge (other modalities). All modalities except RRP were considered technology-intensive.

Results

A total of 552 patients with a mean age of 65.0 years met the inclusion criteria. NCCN risk categories included 85 (13%) low, 218 (41%) favorable-intermediate, and 249 (46%) unfavorable-intermediate risk cases. RALP, RRP, Cryo, and HIFU were single-session treatments, whereas IMRT, SBRT, and LDBT were delivered over multiple sessions. IMRT and SBRT were the most expensive modalities, followed by RALP, HIFU, LDBT, Cryo, and RRP. The number of sessions (ρ = 0.55, p < 0.001) and being technology-intensive (ρ = 0.58, p < 0.001) were significantly correlated with treatment costs.

Conclusions

In this cohort of PCa patients, treatment costs were highest for IMRT and SBRT, followed by RALP, HIFU, LDBT, Cryo, and RRP. The number of treatment sessions was a significant predictor of higher costs.