The Economics of Bladder Cancer: Costs and Considerations of Caring for This Disease
Svatek RS1, Hollenbeck BK2, Holmäng S3, Lee R4, Kim SP5, Stenzl A6, Lotan Y7. Eur Urol. 2014 Jan 21. pii: S0302-2838(14)00018-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.01.006. [Epub ahead of print]

Author information

1Department of Urology, Division of Urologic Oncology, The University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA. 2Department of Urology, Division of Health Services Research and Division of Urologic Oncology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. 3Department of Urology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. 4Department of Urology and Division of Medical Oncology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 5Department of Urology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA. 6Department of Urology, Klinik für Urologie, Tübingen, Germany. 7Department of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA. Electronic address: yair.lotan@utsouthwestern.edu.

Abstract

CONTEXT: Due to high recurrence rates, intensive surveillance strategies, and expensive treatment costs, the management of bladder cancer contributes significantly to medical costs.

OBJECTIVE: To provide a concise evaluation of contemporary cost-related challenges in the care of patients with bladder cancer. An emphasis is placed on the initial diagnosis of bladder cancer and therapy considerations for both non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and more advanced disease.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review of the literature was performed using Medline (1966 to February 2011). Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms for search criteria included "bladder cancer, neoplasms" OR "carcinoma, transitional cell" AND all cost-related MeSH search terms. Studies evaluating the costs associated with of various diagnostic or treatment approaches were reviewed.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Routine use of perioperative chemotherapy following complete transurethral resection of bladder tumor has been estimated to provide a cost savings. Routine office-based fulguration of small low-grade recurrences could decrease costs. Another potential important target for decreasing variation and cost lies in risk-modified surveillance strategies after initial bladder tumor removal to reduce the cost associated with frequent cystoscopic and radiographic procedures. Optimizing postoperative care after radical cystectomy has the potential to decrease length of stay and perioperative morbidity with substantial decreases in perioperative care expenses. The gemcitabine-cisplatin regimen has been estimated to result in a modest increase in cost effectiveness over methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin. Additional costs of therapies need to be balanced with effectiveness, and there are significant gaps in knowledge regarding optimal surveillance and treatment of both early and advanced bladder cancer.

CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of disease severity, improvements in the efficiency of bladder cancer care to limit unnecessary interventions and optimize effective cancer treatment can reduce overall health care costs. Two scenarios where economic and comparative-effectiveness research is limited but would be most beneficial are (1) the management of NMIBC patients where excessive costs are due to vigilant surveillance strategies and (2) in patients with metastatic disease due to the enormous cost associated with late-stage and end-of-life care.