The Cost of Melanoma and Kidney, Prostate, and Ovarian Cancers in Russia
Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the total annual economic burden of melanoma and kidney, prostate, and ovarian cancers in Russia using the unified methods. Methods: The general prevalence-based cost-of-illness model was developed to evaluate the annual health and social care costs and value of lost productivity attributable to the following cancers: melanoma and kidney, prostate, and ovarian cancers from the perspective of the overall governmental budget. All costs were calculated using the “bottom-up” costing technique for the total population of patients with studied cancer, including both newly diagnosed patients stratified by cancer stage and patients diagnosed in previous years who were still alive in the study year. Results: The lowest aggregate annual cost was found for melanoma—€17.48 million (52.4% health care costs, 34.9% social care costs, 12.7% attributed to productivity loss) and the highest—€84.52 million—for prostate cancer (72.0%, 19.0%, and 9.0%, respectively). Introduction According to federal statistics, by the end of 2012 there were almost 3 million cancer patients registered in Russia, approxi- mately 2% of the total population. Cancer is the second leading cause of disability and mortality. More than 280,000 people die because of cancer every year in Russia, almost one third of them being younger than 60 years . Despite the growing understanding of the magnitude of economic burden caused by cancer, data on its actual size in Russia are sparse and there is no unified methodology for accurate estimation. Few cost studies of specific types of cancer in Russia have been conducted; all of them used inconsistent methods and sources of information, especially for the assign- ment of unit costs or prices for the identified resource consump- tion [2–4]. This could be explained by difficulties in data collection resulting from the specifics of the federal surveillance system and health care financing in Russia [5,6]. Such discrepancies in research methods and data make comparison or combination of research findings almost impossible. Consequently, it hinders Estimations for kidney and ovarian cancers were €45.33 and €45.56 million, respectively, with a similar distribution (42.5%–45.2% health care costs, 39.0%–40.3% social care costs, 14.5%–18.5% lost productiv- ity). Cost for a newly diagnosed patient was several times higher than for a patient diagnosed in previous years (€1144– €1947 vs. €145–€417, respectively). For patients in the first year after diagnosis, the major part of economic burden was attributed to health care costs, whereas for those diagnosed before the study year, costs not related to health were more prominent, except for prostate cancer. Conclusions: The economic impact of cancers is more prominent during the first year after diagnosis. A considerable part of the economic burden of cancer lies outside the health sector.
Сancer, cost-of-illness, economic burden, health care costs