ReviewJournal of the National Cancer Institute2010
When is cancer care cost-effective? A systematic overview of cost-utility analyses in oncology.
Review in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 10 of them syntheses 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
60 citing papers in PubMed, 10 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 183 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of the make-up and properties of in vitro models of the healthy and diseased blood-brain barrier.Nature biomedical engineering · 2025Pooled it
- Global representativeness and impact of funding sources in cost-effectiveness research on systemic therapies for advanced breast cancer: A systematic review.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2024Pooled it
- An Exploration of the Utility and Impacts of Implementation Science Strategies by Cancer Registries for Healthcare Improvement: A Systematic Review.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Pooled it
- Worldwide Prevalence of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Denosumab versus bisphosphonates for the treatment of bone metastases from solid tumors: a systematic review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2019Pooled it
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Cancer Prevention, Treatment, and Control: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Analysis of economic evaluations of pharmacological cancer treatments in Spain between 1990 and 2010.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2013Pooled it
- Pharmacoeconomics of the myeloid growth factors: a critical and systematic review.PharmacoEconomics · 2012Pooled it
- Trend analysis of cancer mortality and years of life lost in the South of Iran 2004-2019. Joinpoint regression analysis.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Variation in Cost Centers Following Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- 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
- Article
- Economic analysis of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in the Bone Marrow Transplant Center of Tunisia.Journal of market access & health policy · 2023Article
- The cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation: exploring the Italian National Health System perspective and different patient risk groups.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Nutrition Facts Added-Sugar Labeling and Obesity-Associated Cancer Rates in the US.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- French Value-Set of the QLU-C10D, a Cancer-Specific Utility Measure Derived from the QLQ-C30.Applied health economics and health policy · 2021Article
- The insurability of innovative pharmaceutical cancer technologies.Israel journal of health policy research · 2020Article
- Financial toxicity and its associations with health-related quality of life among urologic cancer patients in an upper middle-income country.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
New cancer treatments pose a substantial financial burden on health-care systems, insurers, patients, and society. Cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of cancer-related interventions have received increased attention in the medical literature and are being used to inform reimbursement decisions in many health-care systems. We identified and reviewed 242 cancer-related CUAs published through 2007 and included in the Tufts Medical Center Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry (www.cearegistry.org). Leading cancer types studied were breast (36% of studies), colorectal (12%), and hematologic cancers (10%). Studies have examined interventions for tertiary prevention (73% of studies), secondary prevention (19%), and primary prevention (8%). We present league tables by disease categories that consist of a description of the intervention, its comparator, the target population, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The median reported incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (in 2008 US $) were $27,000 for breast cancer, $22,000 for colorectal cancer, $34,500 for prostate cancer, $32,000 for lung cancer, and $48,000 for hematologic cancers. The results highlight the many opportunities for efficient investment in cancer care across different cancer types and interventions and the many investments that are inefficient. Because we found only modest improvement in the quality of studies, we suggest that journals provide specific guidance for reporting CUA and assure that authors adhere to guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluations.
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.