Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27019982›Full record

ArticleThe pharmacogenomics journal2017

Cost-effectiveness of using a gene expression profiling test to aid in identifying the primary tumour in patients with cancer of unknown primary.

M B Hannouf, E Winquist, S M Mahmud, M Brackstone, S Sarma, G Rodrigues, P Rogan, J S Hoch, G S Zaric

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The pharmacogenomics journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

M B HannoufDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
E WinquistDepartment of Oncology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
S M MahmudDepartment of Community Health Sciences, College of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
M BrackstoneDepartment of Oncology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
S SarmaDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
G RodriguesDepartment of Radiation Oncology, London Regional Cancer Program, London, Canada.
P RoganDepartment of Biochemistry, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
J S HochInstitute of Health Policy Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
G S ZaricIvey Business School, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Western University · CACanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control · CACancer Care Ontario · CAUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

CIHR 231890
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of a 2000-gene-expression profiling (GEP) test to help identify the primary tumor site when clinicopathological diagnostic evaluation was inconclusive in patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP). We built a decision-analytic-model to project the lifetime clinical and economic consequences of different clinical management strategies for CUP. The model was parameterized using follow-up data from the Manitoba Cancer Registry, cost data from Manitoba Health administrative databases and secondary sources. The 2000-GEP-based strategy compared to current clinical practice resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $44,151 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. The total annual-budget impact was $36.2 million per year. A value-of-information analysis revealed that the expected value of perfect information about the test's clinical impact was $4.2 million per year. The 2000-GEP test should be considered for adoption in CUP. Field evaluations of the test are associated with a large societal benefit.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesHealth Care CostsTranscriptomeBiomarkers, TumorBudgetsCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision TreesGene Expression ProfilingGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansManitobaMarkov ChainsModels, EconomicNeoplasms, Unknown PrimaryPhenotypeBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID27019982
OpenAlexW2314244786

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.