ReviewPharmacoEconomics2006
Aromatase inhibitors in breast cancer: a review of cost considerations and cost effectiveness.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reviewing the quality, health benefit and value for money of chemotherapy and targeted therapy for metastatic breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2017Review
- The impact of structural uncertainty on cost-effectiveness models for adjuvant endocrine breast cancer treatments: the need for disease-specific model standardization and improved guidance.PharmacoEconomics · 2014Article
- Cancer therapy associated bone loss: implications for hip fractures in mid-life women with breast cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2011Article
- Calibrating models in economic evaluation: a comparison of alternative measures of goodness of fit, parameter search strategies and convergence criteria.PharmacoEconomics · 2011Article
- Methodological issues in evaluating cost effectiveness of adjuvant aromatase inhibitors in early breast cancer: a need for improved modelling to aid decision making.PharmacoEconomics · 2008Review
- Letrozole: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in postmenopausal women with breast cancer.PharmacoEconomics · 2006Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have been evaluated clinically in a wide range of breast cancer treatment settings. Although these agents appear to have clinical superiority, they are more expensive than the therapies (primarily tamoxifen) they have been compared with, thus economic evaluation is required to consider their incremental value to the payer. This paper reviews published economic evaluations of AIs as first-line therapy for advanced cancer, and as adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer. The evaluations in the advanced setting demonstrate a range of different modelling techniques and consider the payer's perspective in three healthcare systems. There is broad similarity in the application of standard cohort Markov modelling techniques to evaluate AIs in the early breast cancer setting, covering four separate health system perspectives. AIs appear cost effective compared with current practice. An analysis in the advanced setting suggests that letrozole may be the more cost-effective AI. No direct comparisons of alternative AIs in the adjuvant setting are reported, although indirect comparisons may be feasible. Future evaluations of treatment strategies over the entire course of the disease may also be needed.
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.