ArticleCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2014
Statins and aspirin for chemoprevention in Barrett's esophagus: results of a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Translating Molecular Biology Discoveries to Develop Targeted Cancer Interception in Barrett's Esophagus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Targeting Strategies for Aberrant Lipid Metabolism Reprogramming and the Immune Microenvironment in Esophageal Cancer: A Review.Journal of oncology · 2022Review
- Global burden and epidemiology of Barrett oesophagus and oesophageal cancer.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2021Review
- Visceral Obesity, Metabolic Syndrome, and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Chemoprevention of esophageal adenocarcinoma.Gastroenterology report · 2020Review
- Screening and Surveillance for Barrett's Esophagus: Is It Cost-Effective?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Review
- Adjuvant Statin Therapy for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Cost-Utility Analysis.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Article
- Barrett's oesophagus: Current controversies.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Progression of Barrett's esophagus toward esophageal adenocarcinoma: an overview.Annals of gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Cost-effectiveness of chemoprevention with proton pump inhibitors in Barrett's esophagus.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2014Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Data suggest that aspirin, statins, or a combination of the two drugs may lower the progression of Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, aspirin is associated with potential complications such as gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke, and statins are associated with myopathy. We developed a simulation disease model to study the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of aspirin and statin chemoprevention against esophageal adenocarcinoma. A decision analytic Markov model was constructed to compare four strategies for Barrett's esophagus management; all regimens included standard endoscopic surveillance regimens: (i) endoscopic surveillance alone, (ii) aspirin therapy, (iii) statin therapy, and (iv) combination therapy of aspirin and statin. Endpoints evaluated were life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALY), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the impact of model input uncertainty on results. Assuming an annual progression rate of 0.33% per year from Barrett's esophagus to esophageal adenocarcinoma, aspirin therapy was more effective and cost less than (dominated) endoscopic surveillance alone. When combination therapy was compared with aspirin therapy, the ICER was $158,000/QALY, which was above our willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Statin therapy was dominated by combination therapy. When higher annual cancer progression rates were assumed in the model (0.5% per year), combination therapy was cost-effective compared with aspirin therapy, producing an ICER of $96,000/QALY. In conclusion, aspirin chemoprevention was both more effective and cost less than endoscopic surveillance alone. Combination therapy using both aspirin and statin is expensive but could be cost-effective in patients at higher risk of progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma.
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.