Optimising the Diagnosis of Prostate Cancer in the Era of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis Based on the Prostate MR Imaging Study (PROMIS)

Rita Isabel Neves De Faria, Marta Ferreira Oliveira Soares, David Eldon Spackman, Ahmed Hashim, Louise Brown, Richard Kaplan, Mark Emberton, Mark John Sculpher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Background The current recommendation of using transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUSB) to diagnose prostate cancer misses clinically significant (CS) cancers. More sensitive biopsies (eg, template prostate mapping biopsy [TPMB]) are too resource intensive for routine use, and there is little evidence on multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MPMRI). Objective To identify the most effective and cost-effective way of using these tests to detect CS prostate cancer. Design, setting, and participants Cost-effectiveness modelling of health outcomes and costs of men referred to secondary care with a suspicion of prostate cancer prior to any biopsy in the UK National Health Service using information from the diagnostic Prostate MR Imaging Study (PROMIS). Intervention Combinations of MPMRI, TRUSB, and TPMB, using different definitions and diagnostic cut-offs for CS cancer. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Strategies that detect the most CS cancers given testing costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) given long-term costs. Results and limitations The use of MPMRI first and then up to two MRI-targeted TRUSBs detects more CS cancers per pound spent than a strategy using TRUSB first (sensitivity = 0.95 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.92–0.98] vs 0.91 [95% CI 0.86–0.94]) and is cost effective (ICER = £7,076 [€8350/QALY gained]). The limitations stem from the evidence base in the accuracy of MRI-targeted biopsy and the long-term outcomes of men with CS prostate cancer. Conclusions An MPMRI-first strategy is effective and cost effective for the diagnosis of CS prostate cancer. These findings are sensitive to the test costs, sensitivity of MRI-targeted TRUSB, and long-term outcomes of men with cancer, which warrant more empirical research. This analysis can inform the development of clinical guidelines. Patient summary We found that, under certain assumptions, the use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging first and then up to two transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy is better than the current clinical standard and is good value for money. The use of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging before transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy can detect more clinically significant prostate cancer and be cost effective compared with the use of imaging post-biopsy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)23-30
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Urology
Issue number1
Early online date19 Sept 2017
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2018

Bibliographical note

Copyright © 2017 European Association of Urology.


  • Cost-effectiveness analysis
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Model-based analysis
  • Prostate biopsy
  • Prostate cancer
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging/economics
  • Humans
  • Ultrasonography/economics
  • Decision Support Techniques
  • Male
  • Prostatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging
  • Treatment Outcome
  • United Kingdom
  • Models, Economic
  • State Medicine/economics
  • Image-Guided Biopsy/economics
  • Health Care Costs
  • Neoplasm Grading
  • Time Factors
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Decision Trees

Cite this