Estimated Medicare Cost for Prostate Cancer Care in Older Men

Key Points

  • For men diagnosed in 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, the total 3-year cost for treating and screening each group was estimated to be $1.2 billion.
  • The median per-patient cost within 3 years after prostate cancer diagnosis was $14,453, with treatment costs accounting for 73% of that total.
  • The researchers estimated a cost savings of $320 million per year for Medicare if patients who have a Gleason score of 6 choose active surveillance.

Although national guidelines recommend against prostate cancer screening in men age 70 and older, researchers from the University of North Carolina (UNC) Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center estimate that screening for and treating prostate cancer in men in this age group costs Medicare more than $1.2 billion over a 3-year period for each group of men diagnosed in the United States each year.

Published by Trogdon et al in JAMA Oncology, the study examined the costs associated with screening for prostate cancer, including treatment, for 3 years after diagnosis. They estimated that for men diagnosed in each of 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007, the total cost for treating and screening for each group would be $1.2 billion for 3 years after diagnosis. The study also showed that of the total, $451 million was spent on men who were diagnosed with prostate cancer that is graded with a Gleason score of 6, which is considered to be low-grade disease and is best managed using active surveillance rather than aggressive treatment.

“The tough discussions that happen in health economics are often cases where care is beneficial, but costly…,” said Justin Trogdon, PhD, Associate Professor of Health Policy Management in the UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health and the study’s first author. “This is a scenario where care is probably not beneficial and also costly—and we are putting a dollar figure on just how costly this is.”

Recommended Screening

The researchers said there is a wide recognition that screening for prostate cancer should stop in men at age 70. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends against prostate cancer screening in men above age 70, citing, among other reasons, that the harms from screening are “at least moderate” or greater for men in that age group because of risk of false-positives; harms from biopsy; and harms from treatment, which can include sexual dysfunction and urinary incontinence.

“For patients who are diagnosed with prostate cancer at an older age, because the cancer is often slow-growing, it is unlikely to be the cause of their mortality,” said Ronald C. Chen, MD, MPH, Associate Professor in the UNC School of Medicine Department of Radiation Oncology and the study’s corresponding author. “So, we are not only spending U.S. health-care dollars diagnosing an issue that probably isn’t going to be a problem for patients, but when we treat these patients who don’t need treatment, they [can] suffer unnecessary side effects like urinary incontinence or sexual dysfunction.”

Findings

For the retrospective study, researchers used the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked claims database to analyze costs related to diagnosis and work-up, treatment, follow-up, and side-effect management for nearly 50,000 men 70 years of age or older who were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2004 and 2007. They estimated the cost of diagnosing and treating men for 3 years after diagnosis, as that’s a typical time frame for patients to receive treatment in.

They found that for men diagnosed in each year, the total 3-year cost was $1.2 billion. For men diagnosed in 2004, for example, their estimated cost to Medicare would be $1.2 billion across 3 years. The median per-patient cost within 3 years after prostate cancer diagnosis was $14,453, with treatment costs accounting for 73% of that total. The researchers estimated a cost savings of $320 million per year for Medicare if patients who have a Gleason score of 6 choose active surveillance.

“Studies indicate that we are testing for prostate cancer in people for whom the potential harms [may] outweigh the potential benefits, and then we are treating…people for a cancer that may have little to no impact on their life expectancy,” Dr. Chen said. “Not following guidelines could be putting people’s health at risk, and it is costing the U.S. health-care system a lot of money. It would make more sense to put these resources into other areas that could do more good for patients.”

Researchers write in the study that foregoing aggressive treatment of low-risk prostate cancer in older patients, especially those with other health issues, could prevent harm due to treatment-related side effects, while also providing a savings to Medicare. They suggest that screening men with at least a 10-year life expectancy, and selectively treating those with more aggressive cancer may be one approach to eliminate unnecessary spending while maximizing patient outcomes.

The content in this post has not been reviewed by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc. (ASCO®) and does not necessarily reflect the ideas and opinions of ASCO®.


Advertisement

Advertisement



Advertisement

By continuing to browse this site you permit us and our partners to place identification cookies on your browser and agree to our use of cookies to identify you for marketing. Read our Privacy Policy to learn more.