From the Journals

MRIs, MRI-guided biopsies detect prostate cancer affordably


 

TOPLINE:

Biopsies that rely on MRI to detect prostate cancer are worth the cost, according to research published online in JAMA Network Open.

METHODOLOGY:

  • Investigators ran a simulation of a hypothetical group of 65-year-old men who were at risk for the cancer, as indicated by their prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels.
  • The costs and benefits of periodic ultrasound biopsies were modeled in comparison with those of an annual MRI plus MRI-guided biopsies using epidemiologic and clinical data.
  • The investigators compared the cost-effectiveness of each biopsy approach over a decade, as measured by the cost of procedures divided by the projected gain in life-years.
  • Cost-effectiveness was defined as less than $100,000 for each life-year gain using an MRI in comparison with ultrasound.
  • They stratified the cost-effectiveness of the MRI approach by severity of PSA level: less than 2.5 ng/mL, 2.5-4.0 ng/mL, 4.1-10.0 ng/mL, and greater than 10.0 ng/mL.

TAKEAWAY:

  • For three of the four PSA levels (2.5-4.0 ng/mL, 4.1-10.0 ng/mL, and greater than 10.0 ng/mL) the combination of MRI plus MRI-guided biopsy was cost effective.
  • The MRI-based approach cost $6,000 more than ultrasound for each life-year gained at the highest PSA level of greater than 10.0 ng/mL, which was significantly below the $100,000 threshold.
  • At the lowest PSA level of less than 2.5 ng/mL, the difference between MRI and ultrasound was $187,000, which was above the threshold.

IN PRACTICE:

The researchers wrote that there is “a growing consensus that the use of MRI and potential MRI-guided biopsy is cost effective.”

SOURCE:

Ali Jalali, PhD, a health economist at Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, is the senior author of the study. Simulation data come from the National Vital Statistics Report of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Medicare fee schedule.

LIMITATIONS:

The study is a hypothetical simulation of what could happen under different conditions, not an analysis of data developed over time in clinical practice. It also assumes that PSA levels remain constant over time.

DISCLOSURES:

One author receives grants from Siemens Healthineers for MRI technology development, and another author consults for Promaxo, which develops MRI tools.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Recommended Reading

Predicting prostate cancer risk: Are polygenic risk scores ready for prime time?
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
BCR is unreliable surrogate for overall survival in prostate cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Is this the best screening test for prostate cancer?
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Short-course SBRT: Standard of care in prostate cancer?
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Doublet therapy ups survival in metastatic prostate cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Observation, not radiotherapy, after radical prostatectomy
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Active surveillance preferred in low-risk prostate cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Enzalutamide improves metastasis-free survival, QoL in prostate cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Enfortumab vedotin/pembrolizumab hailed as new standard for upfront mUC
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Black men are at higher risk of prostate cancer at younger ages, lower PSA levels
MDedge Hematology and Oncology