ArticleBritish journal of cancer2011
Cost effectiveness of outpatient treatment for febrile neutropaenia in adult cancer patients.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ambulatory management of low-risk febrile neutropenia in adult oncological patients. Systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Clinical and cost-effectiveness, safety and acceptability ofBMJ open · 2017Pooled it
- Febrile neutropenia in patients treated with chemotherapy/immune checkpoint inhibition: a MASCC consensus statement.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Review
- Real-World Data to Assess the Proportion of Patients Admitted for Febrile Neutropenia That Could Be Considered at Low Risk: The Experience of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Usefulness analysis of the 2018 ASCO/IDSA guideline for outpatient management of fever and neutropenia in adults treated for malignancy.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Evaluation of the clinical Index of Stable febrile neutropenia risk stratification system for management of febrile neutropenia in gynecologic oncology patients.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2021Article
- A cohort study on protocol-based nurse-led out-patient management of post-chemotherapy low-risk febrile neutropenia.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
- Comparison of the MASCC and CISNE scores for identifying low-risk neutropenic fever patients: analysis of data from three emergency departments of cancer centers in three continents.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
- Cost-effectiveness of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy: a simulation modelling approach.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Predicting Infectious ComplicatioNs in Children with Cancer: an external validation study.British journal of cancer · 2017Article
- The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk index score: 10 years of use for identifying low-risk febrile neutropenic cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2013Review
- Health-related quality of life anticipated with different management strategies for febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2012Article
- Developments in the management of febrile neutropenia.British journal of cancer · 2011Article
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 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is uncertainty whether low-risk episodes of febrile neutropaenia (FN) in adult cancer patients are best managed in the in- or outpatient setting.
methodsA Monte Carlo cost-utility model was created to compare four treatment strategies for low-risk FN: (1) treatment in hospital with intravenous antibiotics (HospIV); (2) early discharge after 48 h in-patient observation, followed by oral outpatient treatment (EarlyDC); (3) outpatient management with IV antibiotics (HomeIV); and (4) outpatient management with oral antibiotics (HomePO). The model used a health-care payer perspective and a time horizon of one FN episode. Outcome measures were quality-adjusted FN episodes (QAFNE), costs (Canadian dollars) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Parameter uncertainty was assessed with probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
resultsHomePO was cost saving ($3470 vs $4183), but less effective (0.65 QAFNE vs 0.72 QAFNE) than HomeIV. The corresponding ICER was $10,186 per QAFNE. Both EarlyDC ($6115; 0.66 QAFNE) and HospIV ($13,557; 0.62 QAFNE) were dominated strategies. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $4,000 per QAFNE, HomePO and HomeIV were cost effective in 54 and 38% of simulations, respectively.
interpretationFor adult cancer patients with an episode of low-risk FN, treatment in hospital is more expensive and less effective than outpatient strategies.
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.