ArticlePloS one2015
Economic Impact of Gene Expression Profiling in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer in France.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Is radiomic MRI a feasible alternative to OncotypeDX® recurrence score testing? A systematic review and meta-analysis.BJS open · 2021Pooled it
- 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
- Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of the 21-Gene Assay in Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2018Pooled it
- Genomic signature to guide adjuvant chemotherapy treatment decisions for early breast cancer patients in France: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of Oncotype DX from a Brazilian private medicine perspective: a GBECAM multicenter retrospective study.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022Article
- Defining the Criteria for Reflex Testing forCancers · 2021Review
- Genomic Signatures in Luminal Breast Cancer.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2020Article
- Impact of Genomic Assay Testing and Clinical Factors on Chemotherapy Use After Implementation of Standardized Testing Criteria.The oncologist · 2019Article
- Spotlight on the utility of the Oncotype DXInternational journal of women's health · 2018Review
- Utilization and impact of 21-gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer in clinical practice across the United States: lessons learned from the 2010 to 2012 National Cancer Data Base analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsThe heterogeneous nature of breast cancer can make decisions on adjuvant chemotherapy following surgical resection challenging. Oncotype DX is a validated gene expression profiling test that predicts the likelihood of adjuvant chemotherapy benefit in early-stage breast cancer. The aim of this study is to determine the costs of chemotherapy in private hospitals in France, and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Oncotype DX from national insurance and societal perspectives.
methodsA multicenter study was conducted in seven French private hospitals, capturing retrospective data from 106 patient files. Cost estimates were used in conjunction with a published Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of using Oncotype DX to inform chemotherapy decision making versus standard care. Sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsThe cost of adjuvant chemotherapy in private hospitals was estimated at EUR 8,218 per patient from a national insurance perspective and EUR 10,305 from a societal perspective. Cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that introducing Oncotype DX improved life expectancy (+0.18 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (+0.17 QALYs) versus standard care. Oncotype DX was found cost-effective from a national insurance perspective (EUR 2,134 per QALY gained) and cost saving from a societal perspective versus standard care. Inclusion of lost productivity costs in the modeling analysis meant that costs for eligible patients undergoing Oncotype DX testing were on average EUR 602 lower than costs for those receiving standard care.
conclusionsAs Oncotype DX was found both cost and life-saving from a societal perspective, the test was considered to be dominant to standard care. However, the delay in coverage has the potential to erode the quality of the French healthcare system, thus depriving patients of technologies that could improve clinical outcomes and allow healthcare professionals to better allocate hospital resources to improve the standard of care for all patients.
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.