Complex implementation factors demonstrated when evaluating cost-effectiveness and monitoring racial disparities associated with [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT in prostate cancer men.
| Publication Type | Academic Article |
| Authors | Subramanian K, Martinez J, Huicochea Castellanos S, Ivanidze J, Nagar H, Nicholson S, Youn T, Nauseef J, Tagawa S, Osborne J |
| Journal | Sci Rep |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pagination | 8321 |
| Date Published | 05/23/2023 |
| ISSN | 2045-2322 |
| Keywords | Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography, Prostatic Neoplasms |
| Abstract | Prostate cancer (PC) staging with conventional imaging often includes multiparametric magnetic resonance (MR) of the prostate, computed tomography (CT) of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis, and whole-body bone scintigraphy. The recent development of highly sensitive and specific prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) positron emission tomography (PET) has suggested that prior imaging techniques may be insufficiently sensitive or specific, particularly when evaluating small pathologic lesions. As PSMA PET/CT is considered to be superior for multiple clinical indications, it is being deployed as the new multidisciplinary standard-of-care. Given this, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of [18F]DCFPyL PSMA PET/CT imaging in the evaluation of PC relative to conventional imaging and anti-3-[18F]FACBC (18F-Fluciclovine) PET/CT. We also conducted a single institution review of PSMA PET/CT scans performed primarily for research indications from January 2018 to October 2021. Our snapshot of this period of time in our catchment demonstrated that PSMA PET/CT imaging was disproportionately accessed by men of European ancestry (EA) and those residing in zip codes associated with a higher median household income. The cost-effectiveness analysis demonstrated that [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT should be considered as an alternative to anti-3-[18F]FACBC PET/CT and standard of care imaging for prostate cancer staging. [18F]DCFPyL PET/CT is a new imaging modality to evaluate PC patients with higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting disease than other prostate specific imaging studies. Despite this, access may be inequitable. This discrepancy will need to be addressed proactively as the distribution network of the radiotracer includes both academic and non-academic sites nationwide. |
| DOI | 10.1038/s41598-023-35567-w |
| PubMed ID | 37221397 |
| PubMed Central ID | PMC10205741 |