Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cost-effectiveness analysis of prostate cancer screening

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine Aims and scope

Abstract

To determine the optimal strategy for prostate cancer screening, the cost-effectiveness of screening was analyzed using a medical decision model. One hundred thousand asymptomatic males between the ages of 40 and 69 were modeled with and without screening. The subjects were divided into three 10-year age groups. We used a 5-year survival rate as an effectiveness point and assumed after 5 year survival free from prostate cancer. We considered three potential programs: 1) screening with digital rectal examination (DRE), 2) screening with prostate specific antigen (PSA), and 3) screening with a combination of DRE and PSA. The study was analyzed from the payer’s perspective, and only direct medical costs were included. For each of the three age groups, PSA screening was more cost-effective than either DRE screening or a combination of DRE and PSA screening. The cost-effectiveness ratio for the combination of DRE and PSA screening was 1.1–2.3 times more expensive dian that of PSA screening. If the compliance rate for work-up exams is 80%, the cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer screening is approximate to that of gastric cancer screening. In conclusion, PSA screening is the most cost-effective strategy for prostate cancer screening when compared with both DRE and the combination of DRE and PSA screening. But prostate cancer screening should be carefully conducted, taking the cost-effectiveness of the different strategies and target groups into consideration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference

  1. Vital Statistics of Japan 1995.volume 3. Statistics and Information Department.Minister’s Secretariat. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Tokyo: Health and Statistics Association, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Tominaga S, Aoki K, Hanai A, Kurihara N editors. White paper on cancer statistics. Tokyo: Shinohara Press, 1993 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hamashima C, Yoshida K. Prostate cancer screening in multiphastic health checkup. Jpn J Multiphastic Health Testing and Service, 1998; 25: 275–80 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Shida K. Prostate cancer screening in human dry dock:Results of 5 years, 1989–1993 and study on the age-class of examinees and screening methods. Jpn J Human Dry Dock. 1996; 11: 78–82 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Shida K. Prostate cancer screening in human dry dock:progress in 7 years (1989–1995) and study on expensebearing and examination schedule. Jpn J Human Dry Dock. 1997; 12: 157–60 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Nakagawa S, Ebisvi K, Sugimoto H, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of prostatic cancer screening. Jpn J Uro. 1997; 88: 892–9 (in Japanese).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Watanabe H. Prostate cancer screening in Japan. Jpn Med J. 1993; 3600: 27–34 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  8. The Life Table.Statistics and Information Department. Minister’s Secretariat. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Tokyo:Health and Statistics Association, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Obata K, Kuriyama M, Fujita K, et al. Clinical analysis of 683 prostatic cancer patients in the Tokai urological cancer registry. Acta Urol Jpn 1996; 42: 503–7 (in Japanese).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Interpretation of scores. Institute of Social Insurance, Japan. 1999 (in Japanese).

  11. Katayama Y. Prostatic examinations of mass groups and early detection of cancer of the prostate. Acta Urol Jpn 1987; 33: 1547–9 (in Japanese).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kobayashi Y, Yamaoka K, Ohi G, et al. The economic analysis of home and hospital care for terminally ill patients. Jpn J Public Health 1988; 35: 11–8 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Naito S, Kotoh S, Kumazawa J, et al. Current status and problems of a screening for prostatic cancer in dock in Fukuoka prefecture, Jpn J Uro. 1993; 84: 1227–35 (in Japanese).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kitagawa T, Tukuma H, Kuroishi T, et al. Estimation of cancer incidence based on incidence of cancer registry between 1975 and 1989. J Health and Welfare Statistics 1996; 43(3): 10–8 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gustafsson O, Carlsson P, Norming U, et al. Cost-effective analysis in early detection of prostate cancena evaluation of six screening strategies in a randomly selected population if 2,400 males. Prostate. 1995; 26: 299–309.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. BMJ 1996; 313: 275–83.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Holmberg H, Carlsson P, Lofman O, Varenhorst E. Economic evaluation of screening for prostate cancer: a randomized population based programme during a 10-year periods in Sweden. Health Policy. 1998; 45: 133–47.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Barry MJ, Fleming C, Coley CM, et al. Should Medicare provide reimbursement for prostate-specific antigen testing for early detection of prostate cancer? Part 4: Estimating the risks and benefits of an early detection program. Urology 1995; 46; 445–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Varenhorst E, Berglund K, Lofman O, et al.; Inter-observer variation in assessment of the prostate by digital rectal examination. Br J Uro 1993; 72: 173–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hamashima C. Targeting the age group for gastric cancer screening. J Gastroenterol Mass Survey 1997; 35: 61–8 (in Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Krahn MD, Mahoney JE, Eckman MH, et al. Screening for prostate cancer; A decision analytic view. JAMA 1994; 272: 773–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Littrip PJ. Future benefits and cost-effectiveness of prostate carcinoma screening. American Cancer Society. Cancer 1997; 80: 1864–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Krahn MD, Coombs BA, Levy IG. Current and projected annual direct costs of screening symptomatic males for prostate cancer using prostate-specific antigen. CMAJ 1999; 160: 49–57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Woolf SH. Guide to clinical preventive services; Report of the U.S. preventive task force (second edition); Screening for prostate cancer. Baltimore: Williams &Wilkins, 1996: 119–34.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Labrie F, Cancas B, Dupont A, et al. Screening decreases prostate cancer death: First analysis of the Quebec prospective randomized controlled trial. Prostate 1999; 38: 83–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Gohagan JK, Prorok PC, Kramer BS, Cornett JE. Prostate cancer screening in the prostate, lung, colorectal and ovarian cancer screening trial of the National Cancer Institute. J Uro 1994; 152: 1905–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Schroder FH, Bangma CH. The European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer (ERSPC). Br J Uro 1997; 79 (Suppl.1): 68–71.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Standaert B, Denis L. The European randomized study of screening for prostate cancer; An update. Cancer 1997; 80; 1830–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Boer R, Schroder F. Quebec randomized controlled trial on prostate cancer screening shows no evidence for mortality reduction. Prostate 1999, 40; 130–1.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Alexander FE, Prescott RJ. Reply to Labirie et al. Results of the mortality analysis of the Quebec randomized controlled trial. Prostate 1999, 40; 135–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. The international prostate screening trial evaluation group. Rationale for randomized trial of prostate cancer screening. Euro J Cancer 1999; 35; 262–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Labrie F. Screening and early hormone treatment of prostate cancer are accumulating strong evidence and support. Prostate 2000, 43; 215–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mettlin C. Comment re: Screening and early hormone treatment of prostate cancer are accumulating strong evidence and support. Prostate 2000, 43; 223–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Preventive Medicine, St.Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sogao Miyamae-ku Kawasaki, 216-8511, Kanagawa, Japan

    Chisato Hamashima & Katsumi Yoshida

Authors
  1. Chisato Hamashima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Katsumi Yoshida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hamashima, C., Yoshida, K. Cost-effectiveness analysis of prostate cancer screening. Environ Health Prev Med 5, 111–117 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1265/ehpm.2000.111

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1265/ehpm.2000.111

Keywords

Search

Navigation