ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2017
A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine Alone for Treatment of Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer in Japan.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy Compared with Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced PD-L1-Positive Triple-Negative Breast Cancer from a Japanese Healthcare Perspective.Clinical drug investigation · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Combination with S-1, Durvalumab, or Pembrolizumab as First-Line Triple Treatment for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Article
- Modification of gemcitabine with oxaliplatin in China for unresectable gallbladder cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Advanced gallbladder cancer with high tumor mutation burden: a case report and literature review.AME case reports · 2024Article
- Model-based cost-utility analysis of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and S-1 as triple therapy for advanced biliary tract cancer.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of durvalumab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for biliary tract cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of pegfilgrastim in patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving ramucirumab plus docetaxel in Japan.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin Versus Gemcitabine Plus Oxaliplatin as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Biliary Tract Cancers.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study assessed the cost-effectiveness of combination treatment with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared to treatment with gemcitabine alone for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) in Japan.
methodsA monthly transmitted Markov model of three states was constructed based on the Japan BT-22 trial. Transition probabilities among the health states were derived from a trial conducted in Japan and converted to appropriate parameters for our model. The associated cost components, obtained from a receipt-based survey undertaken at the Aichi Medical University Hospital, were those related to inpatient care, outpatient care, and treatment for BTC. Costs for palliative care and treatment of adverse events were obtained from the National Health Insurance price list. We estimated cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) at a time horizon of 36 months. An annual discount of 3 % for both cost and outcome was considered.
resultsThe base case outcomes indicated that combination therapy was less cost-effective than monotherapy when the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was approximately 14 million yen per QALY gained. The deterministic sensitivity analysis of the ICER revealed that the ICER of the base case was robust. A probabilistic analysis conducted with 10,000-time Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated efficacy at the willingness to pay threshold of 6 million yen per QALY gained for approximately 33 % of the population.
conclusionIn Japan, combination therapy is less cost-effective than monotherapy for treating advanced BTC, regardless of the statistical significance of the two therapies. Useful information on the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy is much needed for the treatment of advanced BTC in Japan.
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.