Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27483001›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Economic Evaluation of Companion Diagnostic Testing for EGFR Mutations and First-Line Targeted Therapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in South Korea.

Eun-A Lim, Haeyoung Lee, Eunmi Bae, Jaeok Lim, Young Kee Shin, Sang-Eun Choi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Evaluation of TwoCancers · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Cost-effectiveness of precision medicine: a scoping review.International journal of public health · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Eun-A LimCollege of Pharmacy, Korea University, Sejong, Korea.
Haeyoung LeeCollege of Pharmacy, Korea University, Sejong, Korea.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8259-920X
Eunmi BaeCollege of Pharmacy, Korea University, Sejong, Korea.
Jaeok LimCollege of Pharmacy, Korea University, Sejong, Korea.
Young Kee ShinCollege of Pharmacy, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Sang-Eun ChoiCollege of Pharmacy, Korea University, Sejong, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs targeted therapy becomes increasingly important, diagnostic techniques for identifying targeted biomarkers have also become an emerging issue. The study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treating patients as guided by epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation status compared with a no-testing strategy that is the current clinical practice in South Korea.

methodsA cost-utility analysis was conducted to compare an EGFR mutation testing strategy with a no-testing strategy from the Korean healthcare payer's perspective. The study population consisted of patients with stage 3b and 4 lung adenocarcinoma. A decision tree model was employed to select the appropriate treatment regimen according to the results of EGFR mutation testing and a Markov model was constructed to simulate disease progression of advanced non-small cell lung cancer. The length of a Markov cycle was one month, and the time horizon was five years (60 cycles).

resultsIn the base case analysis, the testing strategy was a dominant option. Quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYs) were 0.556 and 0.635, and total costs were $23,952 USD and $23,334 USD in the no-testing and testing strategy respectively. The sensitivity analyses showed overall robust results. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) increased when the number of patients to be treated with erlotinib increased, due to the high cost of erlotinib.

conclusionTreating advanced adenocarcinoma based on EGFR mutation status has beneficial effects and saves the cost compared to no testing strategy in South Korea. However, the cost-effectiveness of EGFR mutation testing was heavily affected by the cost-effectiveness of the targeted therapy.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAdenocarcinoma of LungAgedAntineoplastic AgentsCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision TreesErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideFemaleGene ExpressionHealth Care CostsHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMarkov ChainsAntineoplastic AgentsEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsErlotinib HydrochlorideProtein Kinase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID27483001
PMCPMC4970739

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.