ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2009
Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic surgery for duodenal cancer in familial adenomatous polyposis.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Updated European guidelines for clinical management of familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), gastric adenocarcinoma, proximal polyposis of the stomach (GAPPS) and other rare adenomatous polyposis syndromes: a joint EHTG-ESCP revision.The British journal of surgery · 2024Guideline
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDuodenal cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in familial adenomatous polyposis after colorectal cancer. The lifetime risk for developing duodenal cancer is 4% to 10%. Current treatment guidelines recommend endoscopic surveillance with a prophylactic pancreaticoduodenectomy in advanced duodenal polyposis, defined using the Spigelman staging system. Because no clinical trials have assessed this recommendation, a modeling approach was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various treatment strategies.
methodsA Markov model was constructed to estimate the life expectancy and cost of three different strategies: pancreaticoduodenectomy at Spigelman stage III, pancreaticoduodenectomy at Spigelman stage IV, and pancreaticoduodenectomy at cancer diagnosis. A cohort of 30-year-old familial adenomatous polyposis patients with total colectomies was simulated until age 80. The analysis was from a societal perspective. Extensive sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the impact of model uncertainty on results.
resultsAt all stages of polyposis and all ages <80 years, prophylactic surgery at Spigelman stage IV resulted in the greatest life expectancy. Surgery at stage IV was more effective and more expensive than surgery at cancer diagnosis, with an incremental cost of $3,200 per quality-adjusted life year gained. Surgery at stage III was not a viable option. The results were robust to wide variation in model parameters but were sensitive to the post-pancreaticoduodenectomy quality of life score.
conclusionsProphylactic pancreaticoduodenectomy at stage IV duodenal polyposis in familial adenomatous polyposis is a cost-effective approach that results in greater life expectancy than surgery at either stage III or cancer diagnosis.
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.