Long-Term Health Care Costs for Prostate Cancer Patients on Androgen Deprivation Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Comparing relative costs for androgen deprivation therapy (adt) protocols in prostate cancer (pca) requires an examination of all health care resources, not only those specific to pca. The objective of the present study was to use administrative data to estimate total health care costs in a population-based cohort of pca patients. METHODS: = 21,818) by regimen (medical castration, orchiectomy, anti-androgen monotherapy, medical castration with anti-androgen, orchiectomy with anti-androgen) and indication (neoadjuvant, adjuvant, metastatic disease, biochemical recurrence, primary nonmetastatic). Using nonparametric regression methods, with inverse probability weighting to adjust for censoring, and bootstrapping, we computed mean 1-year, 5-year, and 10-year longitudinal total direct medical costs (2009 Canadian dollars). RESULTS: Mean first-year costs were highest for metastatic disease, ranging from $24,400 for orchiectomy to $32,120 for anti-androgen monotherapy. Mean first-year costs for all other indications were less than $20,000. Mean 5-year and 10-year costs were lowest for neoadjuvant treatment: approximately $43,000 and $81,000 respectively, with differences of less than $4,000 between regimens. Annual costs were highest in the first year of adt. Orchiectomy was the least costly regimen for most time periods, but was limited to primary and metastatic indications. Outpatient drugs, including pharmacologic adt, accounted for 17%-65% of total first-year costs. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with combined therapies, the adt monotherapies, particularly orchiectomy when clinically feasible, are more economical. Our methods exemplified the use of algorithms to elucidate clinical information from administrative data. Our approach can be adapted for other cancers to expand the range of studies using Canadian administrative data.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".