ArticlePharmacoEconomics2001
A multinational study to measure the value that patients with cancer place on improved emesis control following cisplatin chemotherapy.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Willingness-to-pay for cancer treatment and outcome: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2022Pooled it
- Randomized double-blind study of the Reliefband as an adjunct to standard antiemetics in patients receiving moderately-high to highly emetogenic chemotherapy.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2003Trial
- Willingness to pay for an mRNA-based anti-cancer treatment: results from a contingent valuation study in Israel.Israel journal of health policy research · 2024Article
- Aprepitant: the evidence for its place in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.Core evidence · 2007Article
- A 'league table' of contingent valuation results for pharmaceutical interventions: a hard pill to swallow?PharmacoEconomics · 2007Review
- Clinical and economic impact of epoetins in cancer care.PharmacoEconomics · 2004Review
- Measuring treatment preferences and willingness to pay for docetaxel in advanced ovarian cancer.PharmacoEconomics · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonists are a new class of agents designed to reduce the risk of emesis following chemotherapy, particularly with cisplatin. Early data from double-blind randomised trials suggest that an orally administered NK1 antagonist can reduce the absolute risk of acute and delayed emesis following cisplatin by 20 and 30%, respectively.
objectiveTo measure the value that patients with cancer place on improved emesis control and quality of life.
designWillingness-to-pay analysis.
settingFive study sites in Canada, Italy, Spain and Greece. PATIENTS AND
participants245 patients with cancer either receiving chemotherapy with cisplatin or who had received cisplatin-based chemotherapy within the previous 6 months.
methodsAfter background information had been presented, patients were asked to define the maximum that they would pay per day for a drug that reduced their risk of acute and delayed (days 2 to 5) emesis by 20 and 30%, respectively. Costs were converted to US dollars ($US) using year 2000 exchange rates.
resultsFor a 20% improvement in acute emesis, Canadian, Italian and Spanish patients with cancer were willing to pay $US46, $US34 and $US63 per day, respectively, compared with $US8 for patients from Greece (p < 0.001). For a 30% improvement in delayed emesis, Canadian, Italian and Spanish patients with cancer were also willing to pay more than their Greek counterparts (SUS41, $US31, $US50 and $US9 daily for 4 days, respectively; p < 0.001). These significant differences in patient value between countries remained, even after adjusting for socioeconomic variables and previous history of emesis.
conclusionsThere are substantial cultural differences in how patients with cancer value benefit and improved quality of life. Since the majority of the world's population resides outside North America and Western Europe, there may be a need to re-evaluate perceived levels of patient benefit and measures of quality of life.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.