ArticleAdvances in therapy2014
Cost-effectiveness of second-line chemotherapy/biologics among elderly metastatic colon cancer patients.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) and SEER-Medicare Databases: Use in Clinical Research for Improving Colorectal Cancer Outcomes.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAdvancements in chemotherapy treatment have improved the clinical management of metastatic colon cancer (mCC) patients. An increasing number of elderly mCC patients receive various combinations of regimens in second-line chemotherapy/biologics treatment (Tx2) after first-line treatment (Tx1) to prolong survival and/or palliate symptoms, but these regimens have higher costs. This analysis investigated the survival benefit and incremental cost associated with Tx2 among elderly mCC patients.
methodsElderly (aged ≥66 years) SEER-Medicare patients diagnosed with mCC in 2003-2007 were identified and followed until death or the end of 2009. Cox regression and partitioned least squares regression were utilized to obtain the survival benefit and incremental cost associated with Tx2 within a 5-year study period. A time-varying model was used to reduce bias due to sequential ordering of Tx1 and Tx2. The regressions controlled for patient demographic characteristics, clinical variables, and a proxy for poor performance. Bootstrapping was used to generate 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsOf the 3,266 elderly mCC patients who received Tx1, 2,744 (84%) died within the observation period; 1,440 (44%) received Tx2. The survival benefit associated with receipt of Tx2 was 0.33 years (95% CI 0.19-0.43), and the associated incremental cost was $40,888 (95% CI 3,044-44,324). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for Tx2 was $123,903 per life year gained (95% CI 9,600-216,082).
conclusionThe estimated survival benefit of receiving second-line chemotherapy/biologics was about 4 months, which is consistent with evidence from clinical trials. This improved survival was associated with an ICER that exceeds the traditional threshold.
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.