The socioeconomic implications of prostate-specific antigen screening.

Widespread PSA screening will increase overall health care costs. This increase will not result from the detection of clinically insignificant prostate cancer, but rather from the stage migration caused by prostate cancer screening. This stage migration will result in a larger percentage of men with prostate cancer undergoing early treatment options, which are more expensive than treatment of late disease. More importantly, early detection of prostate cancer will lead to treatment several years earlier than would have occurred otherwise. Because treatment then will be paid for in current rather than future dollars, the opportunity costs of money will make treatment costs resulting from PSA screening greater than treatment costs resulting from traditional detection. The critical question is what benefits will be obtained by the expenditure of these additional health care dollars. If early treatment of clinically localized cancer has little or no effect on cause-specific survival, the additional health care costs will have been spent only to limit eventual treatment of local symptoms in the screened men. If early treatment of prostate cancer can increase survival, the added expense is more worthwhile. Because there are not adequate data available to address this issue, several approaches have been used to develop models to estimate cost-effectiveness. Decision analysis models have been used to evaluate the effectiveness of prostate cancer screening and treatment and have found little or no benefit. The current review has demonstrated how assumptions used in the models can influence the results. Benoit et al also have constructed a model of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prostate cancer, but in this study only concrete parameters such as cost, published complication rates, and survival data were used. This quantitative analysis demonstrated that prostate cancer screening is an effective and cost-effective health care intervention compared with currently accepted medical interventions. Although men aged 50 to 70 years will potentially benefit the most from PSA screening, this benefit will not be realized until these men are in their seventh and eighth decades of life. Society must decide if the years of life saved in these men warrants the use of its limited health care resources. This decision will be easier when randomized, controlled trials are available to quantify the costs and benefits of PSA screening.