ArticlePharmacoEconomics2015
Cost-effectiveness analysis of prognostic gene expression signature-based stratification of early breast cancer patients.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07379918 (French Prospective Real-life Evaluation of the Endopredict® Genomic Signature for HR-positive,HER2-negative Early Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
French Prospective Real-life Evaluation of the Endopredict® Genomic Signature for HR-positive,HER2-negative Early Breast Cancer
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review of the Cost Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Prevention, Screening, and Treatment Interventions.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Enzymatic colorimetric encoding-based digital medicine for pancreatic cancer diagnosis.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Impact of the EndoPredict genomic assay on treatment decisions for oestrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer patients: benefits of physician selective testing.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- Estimation of the stage-wise costs of breast cancer in Germany using a modeling approach.Frontiers in public health · 2022Review
- Comparison of risk assessment in 1652 early ER positive, HER2 negative breast cancer in a real-world data set: classical pathological parameters vs. 12-gene molecular assay (EndoPredict).Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Article
- A Meal Replacement Program for the Treatment of Obesity: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the Swiss Payer's Perspective.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2021Article
- Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2020Article
- A molecular multi-gene classifier for disease diagnostics.Nature chemistry · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe individual risk of recurrence in hormone receptor-positive primary breast cancer patients determines whether adjuvant endocrine therapy should be combined with chemotherapy. Clinicopathological parameters and molecular tests such as EndoPredict(®) (EPclin) can support decision making in patients with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative cancer.
objectiveUsing a life-long Markov state transition model, we determined the health economic impact and incremental cost effectiveness of EPclin-based risk stratification in combination with clinical guidelines [German-S3, National Comprehensive Cancer Center Network (NCCN), and St. Gallen] to decide on chemotherapy use.
methodsInformation on overall and metastasis-free survival came from Austrian Breast & Colorectal Cancer Study Group clinical trials 6/8 (n = 1,619) and published literature. Effectiveness was assessed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs (2010) were assessed from a German third-party payer perspective.
resultsLifetime costs per patient ranged from <euro>28,268 (St.Gallen and EPclin) to <euro>33,756 (NCCN). Due to an imperfect prognostic value and differences in chemotherapy use, strategies achieved between 13.165 QALYs (NCCN) and 13.173 QALYs (EPclin alone) per patient. Using German-S3 as reference, three strategies showed dominant results (St. Gallen and EPclin, German-S3 and EPclin, EPclin alone). Compared to German-S3, the addition of EPclin saved <euro>3,388 and gained 0.002 QALYs per patient. Combining guidelines with EPclin remained preferable in sensitivity analysis.
conclusionOur study suggests that molecular markers can be sensibly combined with clinical guidelines to determine the risk profile of adjuvant breast cancer patients. Compared with the current German best practice (German-S3), combinations of EPclin with the St. Gallen, German-S3 or NCCN guideline and EPclin alone were dominant from the perspective of the German healthcare system.
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.