ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To prospectively compare health-related quality of life (HRQOL), patient-reported treatment-related symptoms, and costs of iodine-125 permanent implant interstitial brachytherapy (IB) with those of radical prostatectomy (RP) during the first 2 years after these treatments for localized prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 435 men with localized low-risk prostate cancer, from 11 French hospitals, treated with IB (308) or RP (127), were offered to complete the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer core Quality of Life Questionnaire QLQ-C30 version 3 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the prostate cancer specific EORTC QLQ-PR25 module before and at the end of treatment, 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after treatment. Repeated measures analysis of variance and analysis of covariance were conducted on HRQOL changes. Comparative cost analysis covered initial treatment, hospital follow-up, outpatient and production loss costs. RESULTS: Just after treatment, the decrease of global HRQOL was less pronounced in the IB than in the RP group, with a 13.5 points difference (p < 0.0001). A difference slightly in favor of RP was observed 6 months after treatment (-7.5 points, p = 0.0164) and was maintained at 24 months (-8.2 points, p = 0.0379). Impotence and urinary incontinence were more pronounced after RP, whereas urinary frequency, urgency, and urination pain were more frequent after IB. Mean societal costs did not differ between IB (8,019 euros at T24) and RP (8,715 euros at T24, p = 0.0843) regardless of the period. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a similar cost profile in France for IB and RP but with different HRQOL and side effect profiles. Those findings may be used to tailor localized prostate cancer treatments to suit individual patients' needs.
Subject(s)
Brachytherapy , Health Status , Prostatectomy , Prostatic Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery , Quality of Life , Aged , Analysis of Variance , Brachytherapy/adverse effects , Brachytherapy/economics , Brachytherapy/methods , Fecal Incontinence/etiology , France , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Health Care Costs , Hospitalization/economics , Humans , Iridium Radioisotopes/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Multivariate Analysis , Prospective Studies , Prostatectomy/adverse effects , Prostatectomy/economics , Prostatectomy/methods , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathology , Surveys and Questionnaires , Urination Disorders/etiologyABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the direct treatment cost of lung cancer management from progression to death from the viewpoint of the hospital. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study was performed. Data from 100 patients who died of lung cancer and who had received treatment from four different types of hospital were used; the hospitals were public hospitals (teaching and non-teaching), private not-for-profit cancer centres, and private hospitals. Resource utilisation/cost data collected included the cost of diagnosis of the recurrence, the cost of hospitalisations or day care treatments and ambulatory surgery. All resources were valued in 2001 euros. RESULTS: In France, the average cost per patient was euro12 518 for the whole group (78% with non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], and 22% with small cell lung cancer [SCLC]), euro13 969 for patients with NSCLC and euro7369 for patients with SCLC. The higher cost of treatment in patients with NSCLC is explained by longer survival and duration of chemotherapy. In patients with NSCLC, 51% of the total cost corresponded to terminal care, with up to seven lines of chemotherapy. In patients with SCLC, the costs of diagnosis and terminal care each represented 41% of the total cost. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of treatment of recurrence of lung carcinoma is high, and is related to the number of lines of chemotherapy and the use of radiotherapy and surgery.
