Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24380852›Full record

ArticleCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2014

Statins and aspirin for chemoprevention in Barrett's esophagus: results of a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Sung Eun Choi, Katherine E Perzan, Angela C Tramontano, Chung Yin Kong, Chin Hur

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Global burden and epidemiology of Barrett oesophagus and oesophageal cancer.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2021
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Chemoprevention of esophageal adenocarcinoma.Gastroenterology report · 2020
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Barrett's oesophagus: Current controversies.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sung Eun ChoiMassachusetts General Hospital, 101 Merrimac Street, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114. chur@partners.org.
Katherine E Perzan
Angela C Tramontano
Chung Yin Kong
Chin Hur
Massachusetts General Hospital · USHarvard University · US

Funding

Controlling Esophageal Cancer in the US.: A Colloraborative Modeling ProjectU01CA152926 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HUR, CHIN, INADOMI, JOHN MATTHEW · 2010 to 2014
$3.9M
Improving Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Prevention, Screening and TreatmentR01CA140574 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI HUR, CHIN · 2010 to 2018
$3.4M
Applications of Multi-Criteria Optimization (AMCO) to Cancer Simulation ModelingK25CA133141 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI KONG, CHUNG YIN · 2009 to 2013
$844k
NCI NIH HHS K25 CA133141NCI NIH HHS K25-CA133141NCI NIH HHS R01 CA140574NCI NIH HHS R01-CA140574NCI NIH HHS U01 CA152926NCI NIH HHS U01-CA152926
6 · The paper itself

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

AdenocarcinomaAgedAged, 80 and overAspirinBarrett EsophagusCase-Control StudiesChemopreventionCost-Benefit AnalysisEsophageal NeoplasmsHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificityTreatment OutcomeAspirinHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID24380852
PMCPMC3951678
OpenAlexW2103469101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.