Cost–consequence analysis of ¹⁸F-fluciclovine for the staging of recurrent prostate cancer

References

• The American Cancer Society. Cancer facts & figures 2020, table 1. Estimated number of new cancer cases and deaths by sex, US, 2020. [cited 2020 Feb 12]. Available from: https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/annual-cancer-facts-and-figures/2020/estimated-number-of-new-cancer-cases-and-deaths-by-sex-2020.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Caire AA, Sun L, Ode O, et al. Delayed prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radical prostatectomy: how to identify and what are their clinical outcomes? Urology. 2009;74(3):643–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nanni C, Schiavina R, Brunocilla E, et al. 18F-FACBC compared with 11C-choline PET/CT in patients with biochemical relapse after radical prostatectomy: a prospective study in 28 patients. Clin Genitourin Cancer. 2014;12(2):106–110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spratt DE, McHugh DJ, Morris MJ, et al. Management of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer: ensuring the right treatment of the right patient at the right time. Am So Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2018;(38):355–362. DOI:10.1200/EDBK_200319.
   Google Scholar
• National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Prostate cancer (Version 4.2018). [ cited 2018 Oct 22]. Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/prostate.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Andriole GL, Kostakoglu L, Chau A, et al. The impact of positron emission tomography with 18F-fluciclovine on the treatment of biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: results from the LOCATE trial. J Urol. 2019;201(2):322–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scarsbrook AF, Bottomley D, Teoh EJ, et al. Impact of 18F-fluciclovine positron emission tomography on the management of patients with recurrence of prostate cancer: results from the FALCON trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020 Feb 14. pii: S0360-3016(20)30203-0. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.01.050. [Epub ahead of print].
   Google Scholar
• Shen G, Deng H, Hu S, et al. Comparison of choline-PET/CT, MRI, SPECT, and bone scintigraphy in the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with prostate cancer: a meta-analysis. Skeletal Radiol. 2014;43(11):1503–1513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiavina R, Ceci F, Borghesi M, et al. The dilemma of localizing disease relapse after radical treatment for prostate cancer: which is the value of the actual imaging techniques? Curr Radiopharm. 2013;6(2):92–95.
   Google Scholar
• Giovacchini G, Picchio M, Coradeschi E, et al. Predictive factors of [(11)C]choline PET/CT in patients with biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(2):301–309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Szydło M, Jadwiński M, Chmura A, et al. Synthesis, isolation and purification of [(11)C]-choline. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2016;20(3):229–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noone AMHN, Krapcho M, Miller D, et al. (eds). SEER cancer statistics review, 1975–2015: cancer stat facts: prostate cancer. [cited 2018 Oct 22]. Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/prost.html
   Google Scholar
• USA Census Bureau. US population estimates by age and sex. 2018 Apr 19 [cited 2018 Oct 19]. Available from: https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/datasets/2010-2017/national/asrh/?#
   Google Scholar
• Schuster DM, Nieh PT, Jani AB, et al. Anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC positron emission tomography-computerized tomography and (111)In-capromab pendetide single photon emission computerized tomography-computerized tomography for recurrent prostate carcinoma: results of a prospective clinical trial. J Urol. 2014;191(5):1446–1453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akin-Akintayo OO, Jani AB, Odewole O, et al. Change in salvage radiotherapy management based on guidance with FACBC (Fluciclovine) PET/CT in postprostatectomy recurrent prostate cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42(1):e22–e28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Odewole OA, Tade FI, Nieh PT, et al. Recurrent prostate cancer detection with anti-3-[(18)F]FACBC PET/CT: comparison with CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(10):1773–1783.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bach-Gansmo T, Nanni C, Nieh PT, et al. Multisite experience of the safety, detection rate and diagnostic performance of fluciclovine ((18)F) positron emission tomography/computerized tomography imaging in the staging of biochemically recurrent prostate cancer. J Urol. 2017;197(3 Pt 1):676–683.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andriole GL, Kostakoglu L, Chau A, et al. The impact of positron emission tomography with (18)F-fluciclovine on the management of patients with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: results from the LOCATE trial. J Urol. 2018. DOI:10.1016/j.juro.2018.02.2599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solanki AA. The impact of 18F-fluciclovine positron emission tomography on salvage radiation therapy decisions for patients with post-radical prostatectomy recurrence of prostate cancer: results from LOCATE. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102(3):S161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Research Data Assistance Center (ResDac). [ cited 2018 Aug 21]. Available from: https://www.resdac.org/
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. FY 2018 Final rule and correction notice, tables 7A and 7B. [cited 2018 Oct 25]. Available from: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/FY2018-IPPS-Final-Rule-Home-Page-Items/FY2018-IPPS-Final-Rule-Tables.html
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Addendum B.- OPPS payment by HCPCS code for CY 2018. [ cited 2018 Oct 25]. Available from: https://www.cms.gov/apps/ama/license.asp?file=/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/Hospitaloutpatientpps/Downloads/2018-Oct-Addendum-B.zip
   Google Scholar
• Chao MW, Grimm P, Yaxley J, et al. Brachytherapy: state-of-the-art radiotherapy in prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2015;116(Suppl 3):80–88.
   Google Scholar
• Nanni C, Zanoni L, Pultrone C, et al. (18)F-FACBC (anti1-amino-3-(18)F-fluorocyclobutane-1-carboxylic acid) versus (11)C-choline PET/CT in prostate cancer relapse: results of a prospective trial. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(9):1601–1610.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choueiri TK, Dreicer R, Paciorek A, et al. A model that predicts the probability of positive imaging in prostate cancer cases with biochemical failure after initial definitive local therapy. J Urol. 2008;179(3):906–910. discussion 910.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hricak H, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, et al. Imaging prostate cancer: a multidisciplinary perspective. Radiology. 2007;243(1):28–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkham AP, Emberton M, Allen C. How good is MRI at detecting and characterising cancer within the prostate? Eur Urol. 2006;50(6):1163–1174. discussion 1175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf JS Jr., Cher M, Dall’era M, et al. The use and accuracy of cross-sectional imaging and fine needle aspiration cytology for detection of pelvic lymph node metastases before radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 1995;153(3 Pt 2):993–999.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merdan S, Womble PR, Miller DC, et al. Toward better use of bone scans among men with early-stage prostate cancer. Urology. 2014;84(4):793–798.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ikonen S, Karkkainen P, Kivisaari L, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of clinically localized prostatic cancer. J Urol. 1998;159(3):915–919.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Cancer Society. Key statistics for prostate cancer. 2019 [cited 2019 Aug 27]. Available from: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/prostate-cancer/about/key-statistics.html
   Google Scholar