• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Systematic Review on the Cost Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe

P. Vynckier, L. Annemans, S. Raes, C. Amrouch, P. Lindgren, O. Májek, K. Beyer, RCA. Leenen, LDF. Venderbos, F. Denijs, MJ. van Harten, J. Helleman, R. Chloupková, E. Briers, V. Vasilyeva, JG. Rivas, P. Basu, A. Chandran, RCN. van den Bergh, S....

. 2024 ; 86 (5) : 400-408. [pub] 20240523

Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko

Typ dokumentu systematický přehled, časopisecké články, přehledy

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25003740

Grantová podpora
001 World Health Organization - International

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In Europe, prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men. Screening may therefore be crucial to lower health care costs, morbidity, and mortality. This systematic review aimed to provide a contemporary overview of the costs and benefits of PCa screening programmes. METHODS: A peer-reviewed literature search was conducted, using the PICO method. A detailed search strategy was developed in four databases based on the following key search terms: "PCa", "screening", and "cost effectiveness". Any type of economic evaluation was included. The search strategy was restricted to European countries, but no restrictions were set on the year of publication. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 7484 studies were identified initially. Of these, 19 studies described the cost effectiveness of PCa screening in Europe. Among the studies using an initially healthy study population, most focussed on risk- and/or age- and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based screening in addition to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and compared this with no screening. Incremental cost ratios (ICERs) varied from €5872 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) to €372 948/QALY, with a median of €56 487/QALY. Risk-based screening followed by MRI testing seemed to be a more cost-effective strategy than no screening. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This systematic review indicates that screening programmes incorporating a risk-based approach and MRI have the potential to be cost effective. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we looked at the cost effectiveness of prostate cancer screening in Europe. We found that a risk-based approach and incorporation of magnetic resonance imaging has the potential to be cost effective. However, there remains a knowledge gap regarding cost effectiveness of prostate cancer screening. Therefore, determinants of cost effectiveness require further investigation.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25003740
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250206104648.0
007      
ta
008      
250121s2024 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.036 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)38789306
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Vynckier, Pieter $u Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. Electronic address: pieter.vynckier@ugent.be
245    10
$a Systematic Review on the Cost Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Screening in Europe / $c P. Vynckier, L. Annemans, S. Raes, C. Amrouch, P. Lindgren, O. Májek, K. Beyer, RCA. Leenen, LDF. Venderbos, F. Denijs, MJ. van Harten, J. Helleman, R. Chloupková, E. Briers, V. Vasilyeva, JG. Rivas, P. Basu, A. Chandran, RCN. van den Bergh, S. Collen, H. Van Poppel, MJ. Roobol, Members of the PRAISE-U Consortium
520    9_
$a BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In Europe, prostate cancer (PCa) is the most common cancer in men. Screening may therefore be crucial to lower health care costs, morbidity, and mortality. This systematic review aimed to provide a contemporary overview of the costs and benefits of PCa screening programmes. METHODS: A peer-reviewed literature search was conducted, using the PICO method. A detailed search strategy was developed in four databases based on the following key search terms: "PCa", "screening", and "cost effectiveness". Any type of economic evaluation was included. The search strategy was restricted to European countries, but no restrictions were set on the year of publication. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 7484 studies were identified initially. Of these, 19 studies described the cost effectiveness of PCa screening in Europe. Among the studies using an initially healthy study population, most focussed on risk- and/or age- and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based screening in addition to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing and compared this with no screening. Incremental cost ratios (ICERs) varied from €5872 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) to €372 948/QALY, with a median of €56 487/QALY. Risk-based screening followed by MRI testing seemed to be a more cost-effective strategy than no screening. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This systematic review indicates that screening programmes incorporating a risk-based approach and MRI have the potential to be cost effective. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this review, we looked at the cost effectiveness of prostate cancer screening in Europe. We found that a risk-based approach and incorporation of magnetic resonance imaging has the potential to be cost effective. However, there remains a knowledge gap regarding cost effectiveness of prostate cancer screening. Therefore, determinants of cost effectiveness require further investigation.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    12
$a nádory prostaty $x diagnóza $x ekonomika $7 D011471
650    12
$a analýza nákladů a výnosů $7 D003362
650    12
$a časná detekce nádoru $x ekonomika $x metody $7 D055088
650    _2
$a prostatický specifický antigen $x krev $7 D017430
650    _2
$a kvalitativně upravené roky života $7 D019057
650    _2
$a magnetická rezonanční tomografie $x ekonomika $7 D008279
650    _2
$a náklady na zdravotní péči $7 D017048
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a plošný screening $x ekonomika $x metody $7 D008403
650    _2
$a analýza nákladové efektivity $7 D000094703
651    _2
$a Evropa $7 D005060
655    _2
$a systematický přehled $7 D000078182
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a přehledy $7 D016454
700    1_
$a Annemans, Lieven $u Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
700    1_
$a Raes, Sarah $u Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
700    1_
$a Amrouch, Cheïma $u Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium; Department of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
700    1_
$a Lindgren, Peter $u Swedish Institute for Health Economics, Lund, Sweden
700    1_
$a Májek, Ondřej $u National Screening Centre, Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czechia; Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czechia
700    1_
$a Beyer, Katharina $u Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Leenen, Renée C A $u Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Venderbos, Lionne D F $u Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Denijs, Frederique $u Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a van Harten, Meike J $u Cancer Center, Department of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Helleman, Jozien $u Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Chloupková, Renata $u National Screening Centre, Institute of Health Information and Statistics of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czechia; Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czechia
700    1_
$a Briers, Erik $u Europa Uomo, Antwerp, Belgium
700    1_
$a Vasilyeva, Vera $u European Association of Urology, Policy Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Rivas, Juan Gomez $u Department of Urology, Clínico San Carlos University Hospital, Madrid, Spain
700    1_
$a Basu, Partha $u International Agency for Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, Lyon, France
700    1_
$a Chandran, Arunah $u International Agency for Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, Lyon, France
700    1_
$a van den Bergh, Roderick C N $u Department of Urology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Utrecht-Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Collen, Sarah $u European Association of Urology, Policy Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands
700    1_
$a Van Poppel, Hein $u European Association of Urology, Policy Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands; Department of Urology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
700    1_
$a Roobol, Monique J $u Department of Urology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
710    2_
$a Members of the PRAISE-U Consortium
773    0_
$w MED00001669 $t European urology $x 1873-7560 $g Roč. 86, č. 5 (2024), s. 400-408
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38789306 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250121 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250206104644 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2263487 $s 1239747
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 86 $c 5 $d 400-408 $e 20240523 $i 1873-7560 $m European urology $n Eur Urol $x MED00001669
GRA    __
$a 001 $p World Health Organization $2 International
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250121

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Pouze přihlášení uživatelé

Možnosti archivace