Connect
MJA
MJA

Risk assessment to guide prostate cancer screening decisions: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Andrew J Martin, Sarah J Lord, Hannah E Verry, Martin R Stockler and Jon D Emery
Med J Aust 2014; 200 (4): 205. || doi: 10.5694/mja12.11597c
Published online: 3 March 2014
Correction

Error in calculating costs of screening: In “Risk assessment to guide prostate cancer screening decisions: a cost-effectiveness analysis” in the 3 June 2013 issue of the Journal (Med J Aust 2013; 198: 546-550), there was an error in the way screening costs were calculated. These corrections do not alter the study conclusions. The corrected figures are in bold as follows.

Results section of the abstract (page 546): “The base-case incremental cost effectiveness ratio of PSA screening was $168 611 per QALY for men with average risk, $73 452 per QALY for men with two times the average risk, and $22 938 per QALY for men with five times the average risk.”

First paragraph of the results section (page 547): “For men with an average risk, PSA screening led to an additional 2.7 quality-adjusted life-days (14.3 undiscounted) at an additional cost of $1263, giving an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $168 611 per QALY gained. For the high-risk cohort, PSA screening led to an additional 8.3 quality-adjusted life-days (43.0 undiscounted) at an additional cost of $1671, giving an ICER of $73 452 per QALY gained. For the very high-risk cohort, PSA screening led to an additional 32.9 quality adjusted life-days (161.2 undiscounted) at an additional cost of $2067, giving an ICER of $22 938 per QALY gained . . .”.

Second paragraph of the discussion section (page 549): “We estimated that for a 50-year-old man with average risk, PSA screening would lead to an average additional $1263 per individual screened, with negligible increase in quality-adjusted survival. The cost-effectiveness of screening remained unfavourable for the high-risk cohort at $73 452 per QALY gained, but was considerably more attractive for the very high-risk group at $22 938 per QALY gained.”

  • Andrew J Martin1
  • Sarah J Lord1
  • Hannah E Verry1
  • Martin R Stockler1,2,3
  • Jon D Emery4,5

  • 1 NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
  • 2 Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW
  • 3 Concord Hospital, Sydney, NSW.
  • 4 School of Primary, Aboriginal and Rural Health Care, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA.
  • 5 General Practice and Primary Care Academic Centre, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC.


Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Responses are now closed for this article.