This forum is for the discussion of anything to do with Prostate Cancer. There are only four rules:
No fundraisers, no commercials (although it is OK to recommend choices of treatment or medical people based on your personal research; invitations to participate in third-party surveys are also acceptable, provided there is no compensation to YANA);
No harvesting e-mail addresses for Spam;
No insults or flaming - be polite and respectful at all times and understand that there may be a variety of points of view, all of which may have some validity;
Opinions are OK, but please provide as much factual evidence as possible for any assertions that you are making
Failure to abide by these simple rules will result in the immediate and permanent suspension of your posting privileges.
Since this is an International Forum, please specify your location in your post.
It is difficult to separate the apples from the oranges when talking costs, but here is my experience of first year costs in Indiana, USA, choosing active surveillance. Keep in mind that my billed costs are on the low end: only one biopsy, two PSA tests, consultations with two different providers during this first year.
Note that I am over 65, so medicare age, and have additional "retiree" insurance for which I pay about $100 a month that covers my 20% deductible after meeting a set out-of-pocket amount as well as providing medication with a small co-pay.
Had I not had two cataract surgeries, etc, putting me over the top on out-of-pocket, I would have been responsible for the $200. Having chosen AS, I do not know what the billed (or my net) costs would have been for any of the different procedures, but here's a clue for a start point: my two cataract operations (Apr/Oct) had "billed" costs over $10,000 each.
Interesting question Warwick, I would say that Terry's last comment about the string is very appropriate. After completing my research of my treatment options I choose PBT. The most expensive method, but very close to IMRT. The great photon vs proton debate. Nonetheless, assuming that everyone has a PSA and biopsy, the cost (sticker price) of my treatment at Loma Linda was $170,000. My insurance company decided I wasn't worth that much due to depreciation and all, so they said no. I live in the USA and still work so I am privately insured i.e. my company pays the bills not the insurance company. So I appealed to my company and they agreed to pay.
Then the insurance company stepped back in and since they had negotiated a discount for PBT at LL (a service not covered under my policy????) they only paid $52,000 of the total bill.
Before I got my company to pay for the treatment I decided to pay for it myself in cash. That cost was $45,000.
So you've got to ask yourself, "how in the hell can there be such a big difference in cost for the same treatment and what is it really worth anyway?"
The amount I paid was pretty generous compared to what Medicare will pay for the same procedure, about $30,000. It seems like there should be greater equity in the world of health care. I'm sure if you look at any of the other treatments for PCa will find the same difference. It's would be like walking into a car dealer and the sticker says the car costs $100,000 and the dealer will sell it to you today for $30,000. It's like they are just making these numbers up to see if anyone will just pay that amount.
