Cost-effectiveness of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging and MRI-guided biopsy in a population-based prostate cancer screening setting using a micro-simulation model.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) and MRI-guided biopsy has improved the diagnosis of prostate cancer. However, it remains uncertain whether it is cost-effective, especially in a population-based screening strategy. METHODS: We used a micro-simulation model to assess the cost-effectiveness of an MRI-based prostate cancer screening in comparison to the classical prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening, at a population level. The test sensitivity parameters for the mpMRI and MRI-guided biopsy, grade misclassification rates, utility estimates, and the unit costs of different interventions were obtained from literature. We assumed the same screening attendance rate and biopsy compliance rate for both strategies. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis, consisting of 1000 model runs, was performed to estimate a mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and assess uncertainty. A €20,000 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and a discounting rate of 3.5% was considered in the analysis. RESULTS: The MRI-based screening improved the life-years (LY) and QALYs gained by 3.5 and 3, respectively, in comparison to the classical screening pathway. Based on the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the MRI screening pathway leads to total discounted mean incremental costs of €15,413 (95% confidence interval (CI) of €14,556-€16,272) compared to the classical screening pathway. The corresponding discounted mean incremental QALYs gained was 1.36 (95% CI of 1.31-1.40), resulting in a mean ICER of €11,355 per QALY gained. At a WTP threshold of €20,000, the MRI screening pathway has about 84% chance to be more cost-effective than the classical screening pathway. CONCLUSIONS: For triennial screening from age 55-64, incorporation of mpMRI as a reflex test after a positive PSA test result with a subsequent MRI-guided biopsy has a high probability to be more cost-effective as compared with the classical prostate cancer screening pathway.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound ablation for palliation of refractory painful bone metastases.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) is cost-effective compared with medication, for refractory pain from bone metastases in the United States. METHODS: We constructed a Markov state transition model using TreeAge Pro software (TreeAge Software, Inc., Williamstown, MA, USA) to model costs, outcomes, and the cost-effectiveness of a treatment strategy using MRgFUS for palliative treatment of painful bone metastases compared with a Medication Only strategy (Figure 1). Model transition state probabilities, costs (in 2018 US$), and effectiveness data (quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) were derived from available literature, local expert opinion, and reimbursement patterns at two U.S. tertiary academic medical centers actively performing MRgFUS. Costs and QALYs, discounted at three percent per year, were accumulated each month over a 24-month time horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the MRgFUS treatment strategy costs an additional $11,863 over the 2-year time horizon to accumulate additional 0.22 QALYs, equal to a $54,160/QALY ICER, thus making MRgFUS the preferred strategy. One-way sensitivity analyses demonstrate that for the base-case analysis, the crossover point at which Medication Only would instead become the preferred strategy is $23,341 per treatment. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrate that 67 percent of model iterations supported the conclusion of the base case. CONCLUSIONS: Our model demonstrates that MRgFUS is cost-effective compared with Medication Only for palliation of painful bone metastases for patients with medically refractory metastatic bone pain across a range of sensitivity analyses.

Toxicity reduction required for MRI-guided radiotherapy to be cost-effective in the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the toxicity reduction required to justify the added costs of MRI-guided radiotherapy (MR-IGRT) over CT-based image guided radiotherapy (CT-IGRT) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. METHODS: The costs of delivering prostate cancer radiotherapy with MR-IGRT and CT-IGRT in conventional 39 fractions and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) 5 fractions schedules were determined using literature values and cost accounting from two institutions. Gastrointestinal and genitourinary toxicity rates associated with CT-IGRT were summarized from 20 studies. Toxicity-related costs and utilities were obtained from literature values and cost databases. Markov modeling was used to determine the savings per patient for every 1% relative reduction in acute and chronic toxicities by MR-IGRT over 15 years. The costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) saved with toxicity reduction were juxtaposed with the cost increase of MR-IGRT to determine toxicity reduction thresholds for cost-effectiveness. One way sensitivity analyses were performed. Standard $100,000 and $50,000 per QALY ratios were used. RESULTS: The added cost of MR-IGRT was $1,459 per course of SBRT and $10,129 per course of conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. Relative toxicity reductions of 7 and 14% are required for SBRT to be cost-effective using $100,000 and $50,000 per QALY, respectively. Conventional radiotherapy requires relative toxicity reductions of 50 and 94% to be cost-effective. CONCLUSION: From a healthcare perspective, MR-IGRT can reasonably be expected to be cost-effective. Hypofractionated schedules, such a five fraction SBRT, are most likely to be cost-effective as they require only slight reductions in toxicity (7-14%). ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: This is the first detailed economic assessment of MR-IGRT, and it suggests that MR-IGRT can be cost-effective for prostate cancer treatment through toxicity reduction alone.

Prostate Cancer Detection Rate of Freehand versus 3-Dimensional Template Mapping Biopsy Using a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion Device in Biopsy Naïve Men.

PURPOSE: Targeted prostate biopsy devices include a 3-dimensional digital template grid to guide systematic biopsy locations. Following a template could better ensure uniform and well distributed sampling of the prostate compared to the traditional freehand biopsy approach, possibly decreasing the chance of false-negative biopsy. Thus, we determined cancer detection rates obtained by conventional freehand systematic sampling vs template mapping sampling using a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Men who underwent first line conventional or image guided prostate biopsy were identified retrospectively in an institutional review board approved protocol. Excluded from study were men with prior biopsy or treatment or fewer than 10 cores taken. Targeted cores obtained by image guided biopsy were censored from analysis to simulate systematic template biopsy. The resulting cancer detection rate was compared to that of conventional biopsy. RESULTS: We identified 1,582 patients between 2006 and 2014 who met the criteria for analysis, including 1,052 who underwent conventional biopsy and 530 who underwent template biopsy with a magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion device. Patient age, prostate specific antigen and the number of systematic cores were the same in the 2 groups. Template biopsy detected any prostate cancer in 257 of 530 men (48.5%) and clinically significant cancer in 196 (37.0%) while conventional biopsy detected any cancer in 432 of 1,052 (41.0%) (p=0.005) and clinically significant cancer in 308 (29.2%) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Template mapping systematic biopsy detected more prostate cancer than conventional sampling in biopsy naïve men. It is a promising cost-effective alternative to magnetic resonance imaging-ultrasound fusion biopsy as an upfront screening tool.

Early economic evaluation of MRI-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT) and epilepsy surgery for mesial temporal lobe epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: MRI-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT) is a new minimally invasive treatment for temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), with limited effectiveness data. It is unknown if the cost savings associated with shorter hospitalization could offset the high equipment cost of MRgLITT. We examined the cost-utility of MRgLITT versus surgery for TLE from healthcare payer perspective, and the value of additional research to inform policy decision on MRgLITT. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model to evaluate quality adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of MRgLITT versus surgery in TLE, assuming life-time horizon and 1.5% discount rate. Model inputs were derived from the literature. We conducted threshold and sensitivity analyses to examine parameter uncertainties, and expected value of partial perfect information analyses to evaluate the expected monetary benefit of eliminating uncertainty on probabilities associated with MRgLITT. RESULTS: MRgLITT yielded 0.08 more QALYs and cost $7,821 higher than surgery, with ICER of $94,350/QALY. Influential parameters that could change model outcomes include probabilities of becoming seizure-free from disabling seizures state and returning to disabling seizures from seizure-free state 5 years after surgery and MRgLITT, cost of MRgLITT disposable equipment, and utilities of disabling seizures and seizure-free states of surgery and MRgLITT. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed surgery was preferred in more than 50% of iterations. The expected monetary benefit of eliminating uncertainty for probabilities associated with MRgLITT was higher than for utilities associated with MRgLITT. CONCLUSIONS: MRgLITT resulted in more QALYs gained and higher costs compared to surgery in the base-case. The model was sensitive to variations in the cost of MRgLITT disposable equipment. There is value in conducting more research to reduce uncertainty on the probabilities and utilities of MRgLITT, but priority should be given to research focusing on improving the precision of estimates on effectiveness of MRgLITT.

Comparisons between magnetic resonance/ultrasound fusion-guided biopsy and standard biopsy in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: A prospective cohort study.

Prostate-specific antigen is not useful for detection of prostate cancer in Chinese men. The major problems in prostate cancer patients are overdiagnosis and overtreatment. The objective of the study was to test the hypothesis that targeted biopsy is an accurate diagnostic tool for prostate cancer detection than standard biopsy in Chinese men.Total, 998 patients whom multiparticulate multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging had revealed at least 1 lesion in the prostate were included in a cohort. Patients were subjected to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/ultrasound (US) fusion-guided biopsy followed US-guided biopsy. Benefits of a diagnostic test were evaluated by decision curve analysis. Patients who were diagnosed as having prostate cancer by either of biopsies were subjected to radical prostatectomies followed by whole-mounted pathology (n = 578). Spearman rank correlation was performed between the biopsy results and the subtype of prostate cancer at 99% of confidence level.With respect to whole-mounted pathology, for US-guided biopsy, MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy, and combined data of both biopsies, sensitivities were 0.973, 0.983, and 0.973 and accuracies were 0.837, 0.91, and 0.917, respectively. MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy (P = .165) and combined data of both biopsies (P = .182) had the same specificity to whole-mount pathology. However, a US-guided biopsy had not the same specificity to whole-mount pathology (P = .0003). Decision-making zones for radical prostatectomy of different biopsies were in the order of combined data of both biopsies >MRI/US fusion-guided biopsy >US-guided biopsy.Only the targeted biopsy is recommended for the diagnosis of prostate cancer.

Magnetic Resonance-Guided Focused Ultrasound Neurosurgery for Essential Tremor: A Health Technology Assessment.

BACKGROUND: The standard treatment option for medication-refractory essential tremor is invasive neurosurgery. A new, noninvasive alternative is magnetic resonance-guided focused ultrasound (MRgFUS) neurosurgery. We aimed to determine the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of MRgFUS neurosurgery for the treatment of moderate to severe, medication-refractory essential tremor in Ontario. We also spoke with people with essential tremor to gain an understanding of their experiences and thoughts regarding treatment options, including MRgFUS neurosurgery. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the clinical literature published up to April 11, 2017, that examined MRgFUS neurosurgery alone or compared with other interventions for the treatment of moderate to severe, medication-refractory essential tremor. We assessed the risk of bias of each study and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic review of the economic literature and created Markov cohort models to assess the cost-effectiveness of MRgFUS neurosurgery compared with other treatment options, including no surgery. We also estimated the budget impact of publicly funding MRgFUS neurosurgery in Ontario for the next 5 years. To contextualize the potential value of MRgFUS neurosurgery as a treatment option for essential tremor, we spoke with people with essential tremor and their families. RESULTS: Nine studies met our inclusion criteria for the clinical evidence review. In noncomparative studies, MRgFUS neurosurgery was found to significantly improve tremor severity and quality of life and to significantly reduce functional disability (GRADE: very low). It was also found to be significantly more effective than a sham procedure (GRADE: high). We found no significant difference in improvements in tremor severity, functional disability, or quality of life between MRgFUS neurosurgery and deep brain stimulation (GRADE: very low). We found no significant difference in improvement in tremor severity compared with radiofrequency thalamotomy (GRADE: low). MRgFUS neurosurgery has a favourable safety profile.We estimated that MRgFUS neurosurgery has a mean cost of $23,507 and a mean quality-adjusted survival of 3.69 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). We also estimated that the mean costs and QALYs of radiofrequency thalamotomy and deep brain stimulation are $14,978 and 3.61 QALYs, and $57,535 and 3.94 QALYs, respectively. For people ineligible for invasive neurosurgery, we estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of MRgFUS neurosurgery compared with no surgery as $43,075 per QALY gained. In people eligible for invasive neurosurgery, the ICER of MRgFUS neurosurgery compared with radiofrequency thalamotomy is $109,795 per QALY gained; when deep brain stimulation is compared with MRgFUS neurosurgery, the ICER is $134,259 per QALY gained. Of note however, radiofrequency thalamotomy is performed very infrequently in Ontario. We also estimated that the budget impact of publicly funding MRgFUS neurosurgery in Ontario at the current case load (i.e., 48 cases/year) would be about $1 million per year for the next 5 years.People with essential tremor who had undergone MRgFUS neurosurgery reported positive experiences with the procedure. The tremor reduction they experienced improved their ability to perform activities of daily living and improved their quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: MRgFUS neurosurgery is an effective and generally safe treatment option for moderate to severe, medication-refractory essential tremor. It provides a treatment option for people ineligible for invasive neurosurgery and offers a noninvasive option for all people considering neurosurgery.For people ineligible for invasive neurosurgery, MRgFUS neurosurgery is cost-effective compared with no surgery. In people eligible for invasive neurosurgery, MRgFUS neurosurgery may be one of several reasonable options. Publicly funding MRgFUS neurosurgery for the treatment of moderate to severe, medication-refractory essential tremor in Ontario at the current case load would have a net budget impact of about $1 million per year for the next 5 years.People with essential tremor who had undergone MRgFUS neurosurgery reported positive experiences. They liked that it was a noninvasive procedure and reported a substantial reduction in tremor that resulted in an improvement in their quality of life.

Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging and targeted fusion biopsy for early detection of prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how best to use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and targeted MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy for early detection of prostate cancer (PCa) in men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (PSA) concentrations and whether it can be cost-effective. METHODS: A Markov model of PCa onset and progression was developed to estimate the health and economic consequences of PCa screening with MRI. Patients underwent PSA screening from ages 55 to 69 years. Patients with elevated PSA concentrations (>4 ng/mL) underwent MRI, followed by targeted fusion or combined (standard + targeted fusion) biopsy on positive MRI, and standard or no biopsy on negative MRI. Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) score on MRI was used to determine biopsy decisions. Deaths averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were estimated for each strategy. RESULTS: With a negative MRI, standard biopsy was more expensive and had lower QALYs than performing no biopsy. The optimum screening strategy (ICER $23 483/QALY) recommended combined biopsy for patients with PI-RADS score ≥3 and no biopsy for patients with PI-RADS score <3, and reduced the number of screening biopsies by 15%. Threshold analysis suggests MRI continues to be cost-effective when the sensitivity and specificity of MRI and combined biopsy are simultaneously reduced by 19 percentage points. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests MRI followed by targeted MRI/ultrasonography fusion biopsy can be a cost-effective approach to the early detection of PCa.

Clinical Utility of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging as the First-line Tool for Men with High Clinical Suspicion of Prostate Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS-Bx) is recommended by the European Urology Association (EAU) as the first diagnostic modality for men at risk of prostate cancer (PCa). Current EAU guidelines reserve the use of multiparametric MRI to target or guide any repeat biopsy (mpMRI-Bx). It remains uncertain if TRUS-Bx is effective as a first strategy in terms of costs, diagnostic performance, time to diagnosis, and triage for individualised therapy. OBJECTIVE: To determine the diagnostic and treatment costs and the effectiveness of pathways incorporating mpMRI-Bx compared to TRUS-Bx in men at high risk of PCa. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cost and time analysis was performed using data from a randomised single-centre study of 1140 patients (prostate-specific antigen >4ng/ml) divided into two groups: 570 patients underwent an initial TRUS-Bx and 570 underwent 3-T mpMRI-Bx. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Budget analyses were used to compare the diagnostic strategies using reimbursement data from the Italian National Health Security system. Analyses of reimbursable diagnostic and treatment costs were undertaken separately. Histologic outcomes, pathway diagnostic accuracy, therapy choices, and time to diagnosis were compared. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The cumulative diagnosis costs were 14.6% greater for the mpMRI-Bx pathway than for the TRUS strategy, and 5.2-6.0% higher for therapy. Diagnostic costs were €228 946 for mpMRI-Bx and €199 750 for TRUS-Bx, and the corresponding therapy costs were €1 912 000 and €1 802 800. The mpMRI-Bx strategy was highly effective in excluding clinically significant disease (Gleason ≥7; sensitivity and negative predictive value both 100%, 95% confidence interval 98-100%). The time to diagnosis was significantly shorter for the mpMRI-Bx (median 4.0 mo interquartile range [IQR] 3-6) than for the TRUS-Bx strategy (median 6 mo, IQR 4-12; p<0.001). Limitations include the lack of data on costs associated with treatment-related complications and follow-up data. CONCLUSIONS: The mpMRI-Bx strategy is effective for diagnosing patients with a clinical suspicion of PCa and provides more accurate diagnosis, with combined diagnosis and therapy costs only moderately higher than for the standard strategy. PATIENT SUMMARY: It is a matter of debate whether a diagnostic pathway that incorporates multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the first-line test before performing any type of biopsy in men suspected of having prostate cancer (PCa) is cost-effective. Our analysis of the costs for men suspected of harbouring PCa revealed higher diagnostic costs for the MRI approach, with the benefits of greater diagnostic accuracy. Moreover, the combined diagnostic and treatment costs are only modestly higher whenever the same treatment for all patients is considered.

White Paper: Interventional MRI: Current Status and Potential for Development Considering Economic Perspectives, Part 2: Liver and Other Applications in Oncology.

Background MRI is attractive for guiding and monitoring interventional procedures due to its high intrinsic soft tissue contrast and the possibility to measure flow and cardiac function. Methods Technical solutions have been developed for all procedural steps including imaging guidance, MR-safe catheters and instruments and patient monitoring. This has led to widening of the clinical applications. Interventional MRI is becoming increasingly important for the treatment of patients suffering from malignant diseases. The detectability of masses and consequently their accessibility for biopsy is higher, compared to other modalities, due to the high intrinsic soft tissue contrast of MRI. Temperature-dependent sequences allow for minimally invasive and tissue-sparing ablation (A-0 ablation). Conclusion Interventional MRI has become established in the clinical routine for a variety of indications, including biopsies and tumor ablation. Since the economic requirement of covering costs by reimbursement is met and interventional MRI decreases the mortality and morbidity of interventional procedures, broader application of interventional MRI can be expected in the clinical routine in the future. Key points · Particularly for the treatment of oncological patients, interventional MRI is superior to other methods with respect to minimal invasiveness and tissue protection due to the ability to exactly determine tumor borders and to visualize and control the size of the ablation area on the basis of MR temperature measurement.. · Due to the better visualization of targets and the effects of ablation in tissue, interventional MRI can lower the mortality and morbidity associated with these interventions for many indications.. · The complex comparison of costs and reimbursement shows that this application can be performed in a cost-covering manner and broader application can be expected in the future.. Citation Format · Barkhausen J, Kahn T, Krombach GA et al. White Paper: Interventional MRI: Current Status and Potential for Development Considering Economic Perspectives, Part 2: Liver and Other Applications in Oncology. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2017; 189: 1047 - 1054.

White Paper: Interventional MRI: Current Status and Potential for Development Considering Economic Perspectives, Part 1: General Application.

Background MRI is attractive for the guiding and monitoring of interventional procedures due to its high intrinsic soft tissue contrast and the possibility to measure physiologic parameters like flow and cardiac function. Method The current status of interventional MRI for the clinical routine was analyzed. Results The effort needed for the development of MR-safe monitoring systems and instruments initially resulted in the application of interventional MRI only for procedures that could not be performed by other means. Accordingly, biopsy of lesions in the breast, which are not detectable by other modalities, has been performed under MRI guidance for decades. Currently, biopsies of the prostate under MRI guidance are established in a similar fashion. At many sites blind biopsy has already been replaced by MR-guided biopsy or at least by the fusion of MR images with ultrasound. Cardiovascular interventions are performed at several centers for ablation as a treatment for atrial fibrillation. Conclusion Interventional MRI has been established in the clinical routine for a variety of indications. Broader application can be expected in the clinical routine in the future owing to the multiple advantages compared to other techniques. Key points · Due to the significant technical effort, MR-guided interventions are only recommended in the long term for regions in which MRI either facilitates or greatly improves the intervention.. · Breast biopsy of otherwise undetectable target lesions has long been established in the clinical routine. Prostate biopsy is currently being introduced in the clinical routine for similar reasons. Other methods such as MR-guided focused ultrasound for the treatment of uterine fibroids or tumor ablation of metastases represent alternative methods and are offered in many places.. · Endovascular MR-guided interventions offer advantages for a number of indications and have already been clinically established for the treatment of children with congenital heart defects and for atrial ablation at individual centers. Greater application can be expected in the future.. Citation format · Barkhausen J, Kahn T, Krombach GA et al. White Paper: Interventional MRI: Current Status and Potential for Development Considering Economic Perspectives, Part 1: General Application. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2017; 189: 611 - 623.

Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Imaging-Guided Prostate Biopsy Techniques: Systematic Transrectal Ultrasound, Direct In-Bore MRI, and Image Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Three commonly used prostate biopsy approaches are systematic transrectal ultrasound guided, direct in-bore MRI guided, and image fusion guided. The aim of this study was to calculate which strategy is most cost-effective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision tree and Markov model were developed to compare cost-effectiveness. Literature review and expert opinion were used as input. A strategy was deemed cost-effective if the costs of gaining one quality-adjusted life year (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) did not exceed the willingness-to-pay threshold of €80,000 (≈$85,000 in January 2017). A base case analysis was performed to compare systematic transrectal ultrasound- and image fusion-guided biopsies. Because of a lack of appropriate literature regarding the accuracy of direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy, a threshold analysis was performed. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for fusion-guided biopsy compared with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy was €1386 ($1470) per quality-adjusted life year gained, which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus assumed cost-effective. If MRI findings are normal in a patient with clinically significant prostate cancer, the sensitivity of direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy has to be at least 88.8%. If that is the case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is €80,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained and thus cost-effective. CONCLUSION: Fusion-guided biopsy seems to be cost-effective compared with systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy. Future research is needed to determine whether direct in-bore MRI-guided biopsy is the best pathway; in this study a threshold was calculated at which it would be cost-effective.

Interventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinic: The Emory University Experience.

In this article, we share our experience in establishing a clinic-based practice for MR imaging-guided interventions. Clinic resources and operational logistics are described and our institutional cost analysis for supporting the clinic activity is provided. We highlight the overall value of the clinic model in transitioning the field of interventional MR imaging from the "proof-of-concept" to the "working model" era and engage in a detailed discussion of our experience with the positive impact of the clinic on streamlining the procedural workflow, increasing awareness of the technology, expanding referral bases, and boosting the satisfaction of both patients and referring services.

Magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity-focused ultrasound for the treatment of cancer-related pain.

Nandita deSouza speaks to Nick Ward, Commissioning Editor: Nandita deSouza speaks about her involvement in the development of high-frequency ultrasound (HiFU) for the treatment of cancer-related pain. Nandita deSouza is a Professor of translational imaging at The Institute of Cancer Research, (ICR, London, UK) and Honorary Consultant at The Royal Marsden Hospital (London, UK). N deSouza is a co-director of the Cancer Research UK Clinical Magnetic Resonance Research Group at the ICR. In this role she coordinates multidisciplinary research projects involving clinical medicine, physics, biochemistry and engineering that are aimed at improving patient care.

MRI-guided focused ultrasound surgery for uterine fibroid treatment: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a treatment strategy for symptomatic uterine fibroids that uses MRI-guided focused ultrasound as a first-line therapy relative to uterine artery embolization (UAE) or hysterectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We developed a decision-analytic model to compare the cost effectiveness of three first-line treatment strategies: MRI-guided focused ultrasound, UAE, and hysterectomy. Treatment-specific short- and long-term utilities, lifetime costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were incorporated, allowing us to conduct an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, using a societal willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000/QALY to designate a strategy as cost effective. Sensitivity analyses were subsequently performed on all key parameters. RESULTS. In the base-case analysis, UAE as a first-line treatment of symptomatic fibroids was the most effective and expensive strategy (22.75 QALYs; $22,968), followed by MRI-guided focused ultrasound (22.73 QALYs; $20,252) and hysterectomy (22.54 QALYs; $11,253). MRI-guided focused ultrasound was cost effective relative to hysterectomy, with an associated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $47,891/QALY. The ICER of UAE relative to MRI-guided focused ultrasound was $234,565/QALY, exceeding the WTP threshold of $50,000/QALY, therefore rendering MRI-guided focused ultrasound also cost effective relative to UAE. In sensitivity analyses, results were robust to changes in most parameters but were sensitive to changes in probabilities of recurrence, symptom relief, and quality-of-life measures. CONCLUSION. First-line treatment of eligible women with MRI-guided focused ultra-sound is a cost-effective noninvasive strategy. For those not eligible for MRI-guided focused ultra-sound, UAE remains a cost-effective option. These recommendations integrate both the short- and long-term decrements in quality of life associated with the specific treatment modalities.

Cost-effectiveness of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and MR-guided targeted biopsy versus systematic transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy in diagnosing prostate cancer: a modelling study from a health care perspective.

BACKGROUND: The current diagnostic strategy using transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSGB) raises concerns regarding overdiagnosis and overtreatment of prostate cancer (PCa). Interest in integrating multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance-guided biopsy (MRGB) into the diagnostic pathway to reduce overdiagnosis and improve grading is gaining ground, but it remains uncertain whether this image-based strategy is cost-effective. OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of multiparametric MRI and MRGB compared with TRUSGB. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A combined decision tree and Markov model for men with elevated prostate-specific antigen (>4 ng/ml) was developed. Input data were derived from systematic literature searches, meta-analyses, and expert opinion. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and health care costs of both strategies were modelled over 10 yr after initial suspicion of PCa. Probabilistic and threshold analyses were performed to assess uncertainty. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Despite uncertainty around the presented cost-effectiveness estimates, our results suggest that the MRI strategy is cost-effective compared with the standard of care. Expected costs per patient were € 2423 for the MRI strategy and € 2392 for the TRUSGB strategy. Corresponding QALYs were higher for the MRI strategy (7.00 versus 6.90), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of € 323 per QALY. Threshold analysis revealed that MRI is cost-effective when sensitivity of MRGB is ≥ 20%. The probability that the MRI strategy is cost-effective is around 80% at willingness to pay thresholds higher than € 2000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Total costs of the MRI strategy are almost equal with the standard of care, while reduction of overdiagnosis and overtreatment with the MRI strategy leads to an improvement in quality of life. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared costs and quality of life (QoL) of the standard "blind" diagnostic technique with an image-based technique for men with suspicion of prostate cancer. Our results suggest that costs were comparable, with higher QoL for the image-based technique.

MRI-guided and CT-guided cervical nerve root infiltration therapy: a cost comparison.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare the costs of MRI-guided and CT-guided cervical nerve root infiltration for the minimally invasive treatment of radicular neck pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between September 2009 and April 2012, 22 patients (9 men, 13 women; mean age: 48.2 years) underwent MRI-guided (1.0 Tesla, Panorama HFO, Philips) single-site periradicular cervical nerve root infiltration with 40 mg triamcinolone acetonide. A further 64 patients (34 men, 30 women; mean age: 50.3 years) were treated under CT fluoroscopic guidance (Somatom Definition 64, Siemens). The mean overall costs were calculated as the sum of the prorated costs of equipment use (purchase, depreciation, maintenance, and energy costs), personnel costs and expenditure for disposables that were identified for MRI- and CT-guided procedures. Additionally, the cost of ultrasound guidance was calculated. RESULTS: The mean intervention time was 24.9 min. (range: 12 - 36 min.) for MRI-guided infiltration and 19.7 min. (range: 5 - 54 min.) for CT-guided infiltration. The average total costs per patient were EUR 240 for MRI-guided interventions and EUR 124 for CT-guided interventions. These were (MRI/CT guidance) EUR 150/60 for equipment use, EUR 46/40 for personnel, and EUR 44/25 for disposables. The mean overall cost of ultrasound guidance was EUR 76. CONCLUSION: Cervical nerve root infiltration using MRI guidance is still about twice as expensive as infiltration using CT guidance. However, since it does not involve radiation exposure for patients and personnel, MRI-guided nerve root infiltration may become a promising alternative to the CT-guided procedure, especially since a further price decrease is expected for MRI devices and MR-compatible disposables. In contrast, ultrasound remains the less expensive method for nerve root infiltration guidance.