The changing costs of radiation treatment for early prostate cancer in Ontario: a comparison between conventional and conformal external beam radiotherapy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Prostate cancer represents a large part of the workload for radiation oncology departments in Canada. Recent evidence suggests that conformal external beam radiotherapy improves results. The planning and treatment process for conformal patients requires a greater amount of resources that are in short supply in Ontario. An understanding of these differences is important to provide an accurate estimate of future radiation needs of the province. These differences can be quantified in a cost model that portrays the direct costs of delivering external beam radiotherapy in Ontario. With a developed cost model, a prospective direct cost comparison between standard four field external beam radiotherapy versus conformal radiotherapy in early stage prostate carcinoma was designed. METHODS: Activity based costing has been used to create a model of radiotherapy related costs for prostate cancer. A process map was developed which separated the process in five activities for conventional radiotherapy and six activities for dose escalated conformal radiotherapy. Time was recognized as the important cost driver within each activity. The time required for pre-treatment preparation (CT planning, dosimetry, simulation, and other preparatory work) and actual treatment times were collected prospectively. Treatment times were collected in 414 patients. The annual costs of capital equipment purchase costs and specialized construction of hospital space for radiotherapy equipment were amortized using a 6% discount rate plus the cost of annual maintenance. Indirect costs were not included in this cost analysis. RESULTS: An activity based costing model using time as the primary cost driver reflects the additional costs of conformal over conventional external beam radiotherapy. The costs of single phase and double phase six field conformal therapy with 42 fractions delivered was 7867 Canadian dollars and 8227 Canadian dollars per patient. Four field single phase conformal therapy with 28 fractions costs 5723 Canadian dollars. The cost of conventional radiotherapy over 33 fractions was 3068 Canadian dollars. The majority of the cost differences arose from the cost of the additional time needed for treatment per day as well as the extra fractions per patient when compared to conventionally treated patients. The average treatment times per fraction for six field conformal, four field conformal and four field conventional have the median times of 22.72, 20.63 and 11.07 minutes respectively. Planning costs for conformal radiotherapy were up to three times the cost of conventional therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The direct costs of dose escalated conformal external beam radiotherapy are over 2.5 times that of conventional external beam radiotherapy for early stage prostate cancer. These direct costs are a reflection of the additional capital and human resources needed to provide state-of-the-art radiation therapy in the province of Ontario. Planning for radiation oncology needs should consider the additional costs of conformal external beam radiotherapy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".