Medindia

X

New Prostate Cancer Treatment is Less Expensive and Convenient, but may Increase Risks

by Kathy Jones on  March 11, 2014 at 7:58 PM Cancer News   - G J E 4
A new study by Yale School of Medicine researchers highlights a faster and less expensive form of radiotherapy for treating prostate cancer. However, this treatment may cause a higher rate of urinary complications.
 New Prostate Cancer Treatment is Less Expensive and Convenient, but may Increase Risks
New Prostate Cancer Treatment is Less Expensive and Convenient, but may Increase Risks
Advertisement

The standard external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer is called intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is a newer treatment that delivers a greater dose of radiation per treatment than IMRT. As a result, patients receiving SBRT can complete an entire course of treatment in one to two weeks, compared to seven to nine weeks for IMRT. There have been few studies comparing the costs of these treatments, and their toxicity.

Advertisement
This new study — published in the March 10 Journal of Clinical Oncology by researchers at the Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy and Effectiveness Research (COPPER) Center at Yale Cancer Center— compared IMRT to SBRT in a national sample of 4,005 Medicare patients age 66 and older receiving prostate cancer treatment. Participants received either SBRT or IMRT as a primary treatment for prostate cancer during 2008 to 2011.

"All the reports we have about the toxicity of SBRT comes from pioneering institutions," said first author James Yu, M.D., assistant professor of therapeutic radiology at Yale Cancer Center. "But now that SBRT is being used nationally, it is important to determine the costs and complications on a national level."

Yu, senior author Cary Gross, M.D., and their colleagues found that the mean per-patient cost to Medicare for a course of SBRT was about $13,600, compared to $21,000 for IMRT. The team found that at 24 months after the start of the treatment, there were increased side effects for SBRT compared to IMRT, due to urethral irritation, urinary incontinence, and obstruction. However, even when including the cost of treating complications, the overall medical costs due to SBRT were still lower than that of IMRT.

"While these data are by no means definitive, our findings emphasize the need to carefully assess the impact of new cancer treatment technologies in actual practice," said Gross, professor of internal medicine at Yale School of Medicine, and director of the Yale COPPER Center at Yale Cancer Center.



Source: Eurekalert
Advertisement

Post your Comments

Comments should be on the topic and should not be abusive. The editorial team reserves the right to review and moderate the comments posted on the site.
User Avatar
* Your comment can be maximum of 2500 characters
Notify me when reply is posted I agree to the terms and conditions

You May Also Like

Advertisement
View All