ArticlePharmacoEconomics2013
The development and validation of a decision-analytic model representing the full disease course of acute myeloid leukemia.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Patient-level simulation models in cancer care: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating the Validation Process: Embracing Complexity and Transparency in Health Economic Modelling.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin for First-Line Treatment of Patients with Cd-33 Positive Acute Myeloid Leukaemia in Spain.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2021Article
- Microsimulation Modeling in Oncology.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2018Review
- Economic impact of genomic diagnostics for intermediate-risk acute myeloid leukaemia.British journal of haematology · 2016Article
- The Melanoma MAICare Framework: A Microsimulation Model for the Assessment of Individualized Cancer Care.Cancer informatics · 2016Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is moving towards personalized medicine. However, due to the low incidence of AML, it is not always feasible to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of personalized medicine using clinical trials. Decision analytic models provide an alternative data source.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop and validate a decision analytic model that represents the full disease course of AML.
methodsWe used a micro simulation with discrete event components to incorporate both patient and disease heterogeneity. Input parameters were calculated from patient-level data. Two hematologists critically evaluated the model to ensure face validity. Internal and external validity was tested by comparing complete remission (CR) rates and survival outcomes of the model with original data, other clinical trials and a population-based study.
resultsNo significant differences in patient and treatment characteristics, CR rate, 5-year overall and disease-free survival were found between the simulated and original data. External validation showed no significant differences in survival between simulated data and other clinical trials. However, differences existed between the simulated data and a population-based study.
conclusionsThe model developed in this study is proved to be valid for analysis of an AML population participating in a clinical trial. The generalizability of the model to a broader patient population has not been proven yet. Further research is needed to identify differences between the clinical trial population and other AML patients and to incorporate these differences in the model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23640102What 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.