Utilization, healthcare expenditures, and patient costs of definitive treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer in the United States.

370 Background: Radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy are standard-of-care treatments for localized prostate cancer. We studied the contemporary trends in utilization and costs of prostatectomy and radiotherapeutic modalities in the U.S. Methods: We analyzed the MarketScan Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits (MDCR) and Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) Databases (the latter includes patients insured by employer-sponsored plans). We identified men with non-metastatic prostate cancer treated with RP, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), brachytherapy (BT), EBRT combined with BT (EBRT+BT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), or proton beam therapy (PBT) between 2009 and 2021. Year-to-year utilization of each treatment was compared using Kendall’s Tau-b test. Total healthcare and patient out-of-pocket payments within 12 months following treatment initiation were compared among treatment modalities using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: In MDCR, we identified 44,937 patients who received treatment with either RP (n=12,879), EBRT (n=26,193), BT (n=926), EBRT+BT (n=4,706), PBT (n=57), or SBRT (n=176). Between 2009 and 2021, the proportion of patients treated with EBRT increased from 52.5% to 62.2% (trend p<0.001), SBRT increased from 0.4% to 0.5% (p<0.001), BT decreased from 3.1% to 1.0% (p<0.001), and EBRT+BT decreased from 14.8% to 6.8% (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients treated with RP (29.1% vs 29.4%; p=0.82) or PBT (0.1% vs 0.1%; p=0.93). In CCAE, we identified 75,626 patients treated with either RP (n=50,278), EBRT (n=16,985), BT (n=1,243), EBRT+BT (n=6,811), PBT (n=91), or SBRT (n=217). EBRT increased from 20.0% to 24.9% (p<0.001), SBRT increased from 0.1% to 0.8% (p<0.001), BT decreased from 2.5% to 0.7% (p<0.001), and EBRT+BT decreased from 10.6% to 7.4% (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients treated with RP (66.8% to 66.1%; p= 0.82) or PBT (0.1% vs 0.1%; p=0.76). In both cohorts, PBT had the highest 12-month total and patient costs, while BT had the lowest total cost and SBRT had the lowest patient cost (Table). Conclusions: There is increasing use of EBRT and SBRT in the US. Despite BT being the least costly, its utilization, alone or in combination with EBRT, has declined. Distribution of inflation-adjusted total payments 12 months post diagnosis. Payment MDCR CCAE RP EBRT BT EBRT+ BT PBT SBRT P RP EBRT BT EBRT+ BT PBT SBRT P Total ($) Mean (STD) 30,149 (9,217) 56,199 (19,551) 26,241 (7,920) 38,676 (11,089) 69,719 (17,998) 47,861 (17,377) < 0.001 35,175 (4,800) 66,940 (11,397) 27,377 (3,707) 45,875 (6,620) 102,312 (12,090) 52,544 (8,027) <0.001 Patient ($) Mean (STD) 1,102 (255) 1,285 (294) 1,048 (231) 1,287 (299) 1,044 (237) 992 (325) <0.001 1,965 (671) 1,786 (636) 1,554 (569) 2,031 (695) 1,466 (477) 1,524 (536) <0.001

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2025-02-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2025.43.5_suppl.370
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Utilization, healthcare expenditures, and patient costs of definitive treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer in the United States.

Shreyas Joshi, Pretesh Patel, Bruce Hershatter, Vishal R. Dhere et al.
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Utilization, healthcare expenditures, and patient costs of definitive treatment modalities for localized prostate cancer in the United States.

Shreyas Joshi, Pretesh Patel, Bruce Hershatter, Vishal R. Dhere, Sagar A. Patel, Dattatraya Patil, Adam Lorentz, Aaron D. Weiss, Karen D. Godette, Martin G. Sanda, Nikhil Sebastian, Ashesh B. Jani
article en

Abstract

370 Background: Radical prostatectomy (RP) and radiotherapy are standard-of-care treatments for localized prostate cancer. We studied the contemporary trends in utilization and costs of prostatectomy and radiotherapeutic modalities in the U.S. Methods: We analyzed the MarketScan Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits (MDCR) and Commercial Claims and Encounters (CCAE) Databases (the latter includes patients insured by employer-sponsored plans). We identified men with non-metastatic prostate cancer treated with RP, external beam radiation therapy (EBRT), brachytherapy (BT), EBRT combined with BT (EBRT+BT), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), or proton beam therapy (PBT) between 2009 and 2021. Year-to-year utilization of each treatment was compared using Kendall’s Tau-b test. Total healthcare and patient out-of-pocket payments within 12 months following treatment initiation were compared among treatment modalities using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: In MDCR, we identified 44,937 patients who received treatment with either RP (n=12,879), EBRT (n=26,193), BT (n=926), EBRT+BT (n=4,706), PBT (n=57), or SBRT (n=176). Between 2009 and 2021, the proportion of patients treated with EBRT increased from 52.5% to 62.2% (trend p<0.001), SBRT increased from 0.4% to 0.5% (p<0.001), BT decreased from 3.1% to 1.0% (p<0.001), and EBRT+BT decreased from 14.8% to 6.8% (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients treated with RP (29.1% vs 29.4%; p=0.82) or PBT (0.1% vs 0.1%; p=0.93). In CCAE, we identified 75,626 patients treated with either RP (n=50,278), EBRT (n=16,985), BT (n=1,243), EBRT+BT (n=6,811), PBT (n=91), or SBRT (n=217). EBRT increased from 20.0% to 24.9% (p<0.001), SBRT increased from 0.1% to 0.8% (p<0.001), BT decreased from 2.5% to 0.7% (p<0.001), and EBRT+BT decreased from 10.6% to 7.4% (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients treated with RP (66.8% to 66.1%; p= 0.82) or PBT (0.1% vs 0.1%; p=0.76). In both cohorts, PBT had the highest 12-month total and patient costs, while BT had the lowest total cost and SBRT had the lowest patient cost (Table). Conclusions: There is increasing use of EBRT and SBRT in the US. Despite BT being the least costly, its utilization, alone or in combination with EBRT, has declined. Distribution of inflation-adjusted total payments 12 months post diagnosis. Payment MDCR CCAE RP EBRT BT EBRT+ BT PBT SBRT P RP EBRT BT EBRT+ BT PBT SBRT P Total ($) Mean (STD) 30,149 (9,217) 56,199 (19,551) 26,241 (7,920) 38,676 (11,089) 69,719 (17,998) 47,861 (17,377) < 0.001 35,175 (4,800) 66,940 (11,397) 27,377 (3,707) 45,875 (6,620) 102,312 (12,090) 52,544 (8,027) <0.001 Patient ($) Mean (STD) 1,102 (255) 1,285 (294) 1,048 (231) 1,287 (299) 1,044 (237) 992 (325) <0.001 1,965 (671) 1,786 (636) 1,554 (569) 2,031 (695) 1,466 (477) 1,524 (536) <0.001

Journal of Clinical OncologyVol. 43(5_suppl)
Emory University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 96%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.