ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2015
Cost Considerations in the Evaluation and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer.
Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived economic pressure and health-related quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer after surgery: Evidence from China.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Article
- Article
- Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for the Treatment of Colorectal Lesions in China.BioMed research international · 2019Article
- Patient considerations in metastatic colorectal cancer - role of panitumumab.OncoTargets and therapy · 2017Review
- A Patient-Centered Utility Index for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer in the United States.MDM policy & practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
opinion statementAs the cost of cancer care in the United States continues to climb at an alarming rate, it is critically important for the oncology community to begin embracing interventions that provide value to patients and society. This is particularly important in the field of colorectal cancer, where many new high-priced drugs have emerged over the past several years. While adjuvant chemotherapy (FOLFOX and capecitabine) has been shown to fall within accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness, many interventions in the metastatic setting have not. Bevacizumab in the first- and second-line settings as well as EGFR inhibitors across all lines of therapy have been associated with unfavorable cost-effectiveness ratios in several studies conducted in the United States and other countries. A key strategy in improving the cost-effectiveness of CRC treatment in the advanced setting will therefore be to identify predictive biomarkers (e.g., RAS mutation) for therapeutic response to existing drugs as well as drugs in development so that high-priced therapies can be administered to patients most likely to benefit and avoided in those who would not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26162432What 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.