Trial reportPharmacoEconomics2003
Can sequential administration minimise the cost of high dose chemotherapy? An economic assessment in inflammatory breast cancer.
Trial report in PharmacoEconomics, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the potential cost savings of using sequential high dose chemotherapy (HDC), with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (filgrastim) and stem cell support, rather than single course administration of HDC with bone marrow transplantation (BMT) or peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT). PERSPECTIVE: French public hospital perspective.
methodsDirect medical costs of sequential treatment, estimated on the basis of physical quantities of resources consumed by 95 patients with inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) included in a French pilot multicentric trial (PEGASE 02), were compared with those of historical control groups of patients treated with single course HDC, either with BMT (n = 27) or PBSCT (n = 14). Costs were evaluated in 1998 French francs (1 Euro = 6.55957 French francs).
resultsThe total cost of sequential HDC was significantly lower than that for single course HDC both with BMT (-29%; 22,755 Euros vs 32,284 Euros; p < 0.001) or PBSCT (-16%; 22,755 Euros vs 27,209 Euros; p = 0.026). This was mainly due to a reduction in the length of hospitalisation in transplantation units.
conclusionAccording to our results, economic arguments cannot be used against the widespread use of sequential HDC for patients with IBC. However, further economic evaluations based on overall and disease-free survivals alongside a randomised clinical trial are still needed to definitively establish the cost effectiveness of sequential administration of HDC.
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.