ArticleBritish journal of cancer2015
Costs of cancer care for use in economic evaluation: a UK analysis of patient-level routine health system data.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of the Economic Burden of Prostate Cancer: Direct and Indirect Cost Perspectives.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Patient preferences for breast cancer screening: a systematic review update to inform recommendations by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Direct medical costs of young-onset colorectal cancer: a worldwide systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- A Systematic Literature Review of Health Utility Values in Breast Cancer.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Pooled it
- Public support for policies to improve population and planetary health: A population-based online experiment assessing impact of communicating evidence of multiple versus single benefits.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Long-term costs associated with healthcare use of people with cancer in Scotland.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Inequalities in cancer diagnostic outcomes for patients with a learning disability: a retrospective cohort study in England.BMJ oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Differences in Health Care Expenditures by Cancer Patients During Their Last Year of Life: A Registry-Based Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- A systematic review of the economic burden of colorectal cancer.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Medical costs of Swedish nursing home residents at the end of life: a retrospective observational registry study.BMC geriatrics · 2024Observational
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness requirements for implementing artificial intelligence technology in the Women's UK Breast Cancer Screening service.Nature communications · 2023Article
- The burden of colorectal cancer survivors in the Netherlands: costs, utilities, and associated patient characteristics.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2022Article
- Can National Registries Contribute to Predict the Risk of Cancer? The Cancer Risk Assessment Model (CRAM).Cancers · 2022Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery and non-surgical weight management programmes for adults with severe obesity: a decision analysis model.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2021Article
- Resource Use and Costs Associated to the Initial Phase of Treatment for Patients with Colorectal Cancer Receiving Post-Surgery Chemotherapy: A Cost Analysis from a Healthcare Perspective.Iranian journal of public health · 2021Article
- The Economic Burden Associated with the Management of Different Stages of Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cost of Illness Analysis in Saudi Arabia.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe rising financial burden of cancer on health-care systems worldwide has led to the increased demand for evidence-based research on which to base reimbursement decisions. Economic evaluations are an integral component of this necessary research. Ascertainment of reliable health-care cost and quality-of-life estimates to inform such studies has historically been challenging, but recent advances in informatics in the United Kingdom provide new opportunities.
methodsThe costs of hospital care for breast, colorectal and prostate cancer disease-free survivors were calculated over 15 months from initial diagnosis of cancer using routinely collected data within a UK National Health Service (NHS) Hospital Trust. Costs were linked at patient level to patient-reported outcomes and registry-derived sociodemographic factors. Predictors of cost and the relationship between costs and patient-reported utility were examined.
resultsThe study population included 223 breast cancer patients, 145 colorectal and 104 prostate cancer patients. The mean 15-month cumulative health-care costs were £12 595 (95% CI £11 517-£13 722), £12 643 (£11 282-£14 102) and £3722 (£3263-£4208), per-patient respectively. The majority of costs occurred within the first 6 months from diagnosis. Clinical stage was the most important predictor of costs for all cancer types. EQ-5D score was predictive of costs in colorectal cancer but not in breast or prostate cancer.
conclusionIt is now possible to evaluate health-care cost using routine NHS data sets. Such methods can be utilised in future retrospective and prospective studies to efficiently collect economic data.
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.