To determine the optimal strategy for @entity263 screening, the cost-effectiveness of screening was analyzed using a medical decision model. One hundred thousand asymptomatic males between the ages of 40 and 69 were modeled with and without screening. The subjects were divided into three 10-year age groups. We used a 5-year survival rate as an effectiveness point and assumed after 5 year survival free from @entity263 . We considered three potential programs: 1) screening with digital rectal examination (DRE), 2) screening with @entity1486 ) screening with a combination of DRE and @entity1486 . The study was analyzed from the payer's perspective, and only direct medical costs were included. For each of the three age groups, @entity1486 screening was more cost-effective than either DRE screening or a combination of DRE and @entity1486 screening. The cost-effectiveness ratio for the combination of DRE and @entity1486 screening was 1.1-2.3 times more expensive dian that of @entity1486 screening. If the compliance rate for work-up exams is 80%, the cost-effectiveness of @entity263 screening is approximate to that of @entity356 screening. In conclusion, @entity1486 screening is the most cost-effective strategy for @entity263 screening when compared with both DRE and the combination of DRE and @entity1486 screening. But @entity263 screening should be carefully conducted, taking the cost-effectiveness of the different strategies and target groups into consideration.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of XXXX screening.

@entity263 :: ('MESH:D011471', 'Disease') :: ['prostate cancer'] @entity356 :: ('MESH:D013274', 'Disease') :: ['gastric cancer'] @entity1486 :: ('354', 'Gene') :: ['PSA', 'prostate specific antigen (PSA), and 3']
@entity263 :: (MESH:D011471,Disease) :: ['prostate cancer']
