Search the Site
Follow TheCancerLetter on Twitter
join our mailing list

Enter your name and email address to receive an update when we post new content.

IP Login

The Cost of Healthcare How to Become a Urology Millionaire...Alas, One Little Problem—Overtreatment

publication date: Apr 16, 2012
Download Print Send a summary of this page to someone via email.
If marketing materials are to be believed, the advantages of being able 
to perform intensity-modulated radiotherapy can be worth as much as $6 million 
in gross revenue per year to a urology practice. Setting up a pathology lab on 
the premises can be worth another $1 million.
Generally, the practice of “self-referral,” or referring patients to healthcare 
entities in which the doctor prescribing a procedure has an interest, is verboten by 
the “Stark laws” that govern Medicare and Medicaid. 
However, these laws leave open a loophole—for situations where such services 
are provided by a member of the referring physician’s practice and when the services 
are provided in the building that houses the practice.
In urology practices, the loophole covers pathology, radiation therapy and
diagnostic radiology.
How does ownership of a lab or an IMRT affect utilization of these services? 
Two papers published in the April issue of the journal Health Affairs suggest that 
self-referral increases the number of biopsies in urology practices that own labs, and 
creates financial pressures that appear to direct patients with lower-risk prostate cancer 
to receive IMRT. There is no data that would suggest that IMRT, which costs more, 
is superior to other radiation treatments. 
The first of the studies found that urologists are more likely to perform surgical 
biopsies if they are able to self-refer, as opposed to referring such patients outside 
their practices. This study was conducted by Jean Mitchell, a public policy professor 
at Georgetown University. 
The second study observed that IMRT is now just as likely to be used in men 
with low-risk disease as in men with high-risk disease. 
The proliferation raises concerns about overtreatment and increased costs—
since the therapy costs $15,000 to $20,000 more than standard care, said researchers. 
The study was led by Bruce Jacobs, a fellow in urologic oncology, endourology, and 
health services research at the University of Michigan. 
Pathologists and radiation oncologists are unhappy with these changes in 
urology, which cut into the services they have traditionally provided.



Copyright (c) 2013 The Cancer Letter Inc.