Cargando…

Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019

PURPOSE: Focal therapy (FT) offers an alternative approach for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment in selected patients. However, little is known on its actual establishment in health care reality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We defined FT as high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), hyperthermia ablation, cr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Flegar, Luka, Zacharis, Aristeidis, Aksoy, Cem, Heers, Hendrik, Derigs, Marcus, Eisenmenger, Nicole, Borkowetz, Angelika, Groeben, Christer, Huber, Johannes
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9236973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35562598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04024-0
_version_ 1784736659903873024
author Flegar, Luka
Zacharis, Aristeidis
Aksoy, Cem
Heers, Hendrik
Derigs, Marcus
Eisenmenger, Nicole
Borkowetz, Angelika
Groeben, Christer
Huber, Johannes
author_facet Flegar, Luka
Zacharis, Aristeidis
Aksoy, Cem
Heers, Hendrik
Derigs, Marcus
Eisenmenger, Nicole
Borkowetz, Angelika
Groeben, Christer
Huber, Johannes
author_sort Flegar, Luka
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Focal therapy (FT) offers an alternative approach for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment in selected patients. However, little is known on its actual establishment in health care reality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We defined FT as high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), hyperthermia ablation, cryotherapy, transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) or vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) TOOKAD(®). We analyzed the nationwide German hospital billing database for a PCa diagnosis in combination with FT. For analyses on the hospital level, we used the reimbursement.INFO tool based on hospitals’ quality reports. The study period was 2006 to 2019. RESULTS: We identified 23,677 cases of FT from 2006 to 2019. Considering all PCa cases with surgery, radiotherapy or FT, the share of FT was stable at 4%. The annual caseload of FT increased to a maximum of 2653 cases in 2008 (p < 0.001) and then decreased to 1182 cases in 2014 (p < 0.001). Since 2015, the cases of FT remained on a plateau around 1400 cases per year. The share of HIFU was stable at 92–96% from 2006 to 2017 and decreased thereafter to 75% in 2019 (p = 0.015). In 2019, VTP-TOOKAD(®) increased to 11.5% and TULSA to 6%. In 2006, 21% (62/299) of urological departments performed FT and 20 departments reached > 20 FT procedures. In 2019, 16% (58/368) of urological departments performed FT and 7 departments reached > 20 FT. In 2019, 25 urological departments offered FT other than HIFU: 5 centers hyperthermia ablation, 11 centers VTP TOOKAD(®), 3 centers cryotherapy, 6 centers TULSA. CONCLUSION: The FT development in Germany followed the Gartner hype cycle. While HIFU treatment is the most commonly performed FT, the share of newer FT modalities such as VTP-TOOKAD(®) and TULSA is remarkably increasing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-022-04024-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9236973
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92369732022-06-29 Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019 Flegar, Luka Zacharis, Aristeidis Aksoy, Cem Heers, Hendrik Derigs, Marcus Eisenmenger, Nicole Borkowetz, Angelika Groeben, Christer Huber, Johannes World J Urol Original Article PURPOSE: Focal therapy (FT) offers an alternative approach for prostate cancer (PCa) treatment in selected patients. However, little is known on its actual establishment in health care reality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We defined FT as high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), hyperthermia ablation, cryotherapy, transurethral ultrasound ablation (TULSA) or vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy (VTP) TOOKAD(®). We analyzed the nationwide German hospital billing database for a PCa diagnosis in combination with FT. For analyses on the hospital level, we used the reimbursement.INFO tool based on hospitals’ quality reports. The study period was 2006 to 2019. RESULTS: We identified 23,677 cases of FT from 2006 to 2019. Considering all PCa cases with surgery, radiotherapy or FT, the share of FT was stable at 4%. The annual caseload of FT increased to a maximum of 2653 cases in 2008 (p < 0.001) and then decreased to 1182 cases in 2014 (p < 0.001). Since 2015, the cases of FT remained on a plateau around 1400 cases per year. The share of HIFU was stable at 92–96% from 2006 to 2017 and decreased thereafter to 75% in 2019 (p = 0.015). In 2019, VTP-TOOKAD(®) increased to 11.5% and TULSA to 6%. In 2006, 21% (62/299) of urological departments performed FT and 20 departments reached > 20 FT procedures. In 2019, 16% (58/368) of urological departments performed FT and 7 departments reached > 20 FT. In 2019, 25 urological departments offered FT other than HIFU: 5 centers hyperthermia ablation, 11 centers VTP TOOKAD(®), 3 centers cryotherapy, 6 centers TULSA. CONCLUSION: The FT development in Germany followed the Gartner hype cycle. While HIFU treatment is the most commonly performed FT, the share of newer FT modalities such as VTP-TOOKAD(®) and TULSA is remarkably increasing. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-022-04024-0. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-05-13 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9236973/ /pubmed/35562598 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04024-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Flegar, Luka
Zacharis, Aristeidis
Aksoy, Cem
Heers, Hendrik
Derigs, Marcus
Eisenmenger, Nicole
Borkowetz, Angelika
Groeben, Christer
Huber, Johannes
Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019
title Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019
title_full Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019
title_fullStr Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019
title_full_unstemmed Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019
title_short Alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in Germany from 2006 to 2019
title_sort alternative- and focal therapy trends for prostate cancer: a total population analysis of in-patient treatments in germany from 2006 to 2019
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9236973/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35562598
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00345-022-04024-0
work_keys_str_mv AT flegarluka alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT zacharisaristeidis alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT aksoycem alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT heershendrik alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT derigsmarcus alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT eisenmengernicole alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT borkowetzangelika alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT groebenchrister alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019
AT huberjohannes alternativeandfocaltherapytrendsforprostatecanceratotalpopulationanalysisofinpatienttreatmentsingermanyfrom2006to2019