Benefit, Harm, and Cost-effectiveness Associated With Magnetic Resonance Imaging Before Biopsy in Age-based and Risk-stratified Screening for Prostate Cancer.


Journal

JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 03 2021
Historique:
entrez: 11 3 2021
pubmed: 12 3 2021
medline: 29 4 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

If magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) mitigates overdiagnosis of prostate cancer while improving the detection of clinically significant cases, including MRI in a screening program for prostate cancer could be considered. To evaluate the benefit-harm profiles and cost-effectiveness associated with MRI before biopsy compared with biopsy-first screening for prostate cancer using age-based and risk-stratified screening strategies. This decision analytical model used a life-table approach and was conducted between December 2019 and July 2020. A hypothetical cohort of 4.48 million men in England aged 55 to 69 years were analyzed and followed-up to 90 years of age. No screening, age-based screening, and risk-stratified screening in the hypothetical cohort. Age-based screening consisted of screening every 4 years with prostate-specific antigen between the ages of 55 and 69 years. Risk-stratified screening used age and polygenic risk profiles. The benefit-harm profile (deaths from prostate cancer, quality-adjusted life-years, overdiagnosis, and biopsies) and cost-effectiveness (net monetary benefit, from a health care system perspective) were analyzed. Both age-based and risk-stratified screening were evaluated using a biopsy-first and an MRI-first diagnostic pathway. Results were derived from probabilistic analyses and were discounted at 3.5% per annum. The hypothetical cohort included 4.48 million men in England, ranging in age from 55 to 69 years (median, 62 years). Compared with biopsy-first age-based screening, MRI-first age-based screening was associated with 0.9% (1368; 95% uncertainty interval [UI], 1370-1409) fewer deaths from prostate cancer, 14.9% (12 370; 95% UI, 11 100-13 670) fewer overdiagnoses, and 33.8% (650 500; 95% UI, 463 200-907 000) fewer biopsies. At 10-year absolute risk thresholds of 2% and 10%, MRI-first risk-stratified screening was associated with between 10.4% (7335; 95% UI, 6630-8098) and 72.6% (51 250; 95% UI, 46 070-56 890) fewer overdiagnosed cancers, respectively, and between 21.7% fewer MRIs (412 100; 95% UI, 411 400-412 900) and 53.5% fewer biopsies (1 016 000; 95% UI, 1 010 000-1 022 000), respectively, compared with MRI-first age-based screening. The most cost-effective strategies at willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20 000 (US $26 000) and £30 000 (US $39 000) per quality-adjusted life-year gained were MRI-first risk-stratified screening at 10-year absolute risk thresholds of 8.5% and 7.5%, respectively. In this decision analytical model of a hypothetical cohort, an MRI-first diagnostic pathway was associated with an improvement in the benefit-harm profile and cost-effectiveness of screening for prostate cancer compared with biopsy-first screening. These improvements were greater when using risk-stratified screening based on age and polygenic risk profile and may warrant prospective evaluation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33704474
pii: 2777401
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.37657
pmc: PMC7953309
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e2037657

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Références

BMJ. 2018 Jan 10;360:j5757
pubmed: 29321194
Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822
pubmed: 28110982
N Engl J Med. 2020 Mar 5;382(10):917-928
pubmed: 32130814
Nat Commun. 2018 Nov 5;9(1):4616
pubmed: 30397198
N Engl J Med. 2012 Aug 16;367(7):595-605
pubmed: 22894572
N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13;375(15):1415-1424
pubmed: 27626136
N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777
pubmed: 29552975
Eur Urol. 2019 Jul;76(1):43-51
pubmed: 30824296
Eur Urol. 2016 Jan;69(1):16-40
pubmed: 26427566
Value Health. 2011 Jun;14(4):539-45
pubmed: 21669378
Lancet. 2014 Dec 6;384(9959):2027-35
pubmed: 25108889
Genet Med. 2015 Oct;17(10):789-95
pubmed: 25569441
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Nov 1;4(11):1504-1510
pubmed: 29978189
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Apr 25;4:CD012663
pubmed: 31022301
BMJ. 2018 Sep 5;362:k3519
pubmed: 30185521
Br J Cancer. 2009 Apr 7;100(7):1198-204
pubmed: 19293796
PLoS Med. 2019 Dec 20;16(12):e1002998
pubmed: 31860675
JAMA. 2018 May 8;319(18):1901-1913
pubmed: 29801017
Palliat Med. 2015 Dec;29(10):899-907
pubmed: 26199134
Eur Urol. 2018 Jan;73(1):23-30
pubmed: 28935163
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 Jul;29(7):1381-1388
pubmed: 32385116
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 2;2(8):e198427
pubmed: 31390032

Auteurs

Thomas Callender (T)

Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Mark Emberton (M)

Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Stephen Morris (S)

Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Paul D P Pharoah (PDP)

Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Department of Oncology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

Nora Pashayan (N)

Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, United Kingdom.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH