ArticleCancers2025
Direct and Indirect Costs of Prostate Cancer: A Comprehensive Assessment of Economic and Social Impact.
Article in Cancers, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of the Economic Burden of Prostate Cancer: Direct and Indirect Cost Perspectives.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundProstate cancer is the second most common malignant cancer among men, and according to the predictions, the estimated number of new cases will substantially grow in the coming years. Therefore, the costs of the disease will increase as well.
methodsWe conducted a literature review of the state of knowledge about the costs of treatment and the economic burden of prostate cancer. The vast majority of studies were focused on direct costs only, which clearly shows the literature gap.
resultsWe focused on the estimates of direct costs, i.e., treatment of prostate cancer, adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment, and supportive and palliative care, and indirect costs. Cost-effectiveness analyses indicated that docetaxel combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was the most cost-effective strategy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER): USD 13,647). In contrast, novel therapies such as PARP inhibitors and whole-genome-sequencing-guided treatments were not cost-effective unless drug prices were reduced by 47-70%. In the United States, 5-year cumulative treatment costs ranged from USD 48,000 for conservative management to over USD 91,000 for radiotherapy, while out-of-pocket expenses averaged AUD 1172 in Australia. Indirect costs were also considerable, with Slovakia reporting an increase in sick leave costs from EUR 1.2 million in 2014 to EUR 2.1 million in 2022.
conclusionsMetastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were the most frequent categories for various treatment cost evaluations. A few specific combinations of drugs were cost-effective only under the condition of dropping the unit prices of a medication. Further summarizing, reviewing, and developing a methodology for standardized comparisons are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.