ArticleJournal of neuro-oncology2017
The clinical and financial impact of a pediatric surgical neuro-oncology clinical trial.
Article in Journal of neuro-oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pediatric surgical trials are rare and the impact of such trials on the institutions in which they are conducted is unknown. The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical and financial impact of The Re-MATCH trial, a Phase I clinical trial requiring the biopsy or resection of recurrent medulloblastoma or PNET for enrollment. Inpatient financial and clinical volume information was collected during the 3 years of trial enrollment and the years preceding and following it. The primary endpoints were the difference in direct contribution margin (DCM), or net gain, of study and non-study patients and the difference in surgical volume during the study and non-study periods. The trial enrolled 18 patients; 15 had surgery at the sponsor institution and three had surgery at their home institution, then transferred tumor material to the sponsor institution. There were no differences between the two groups for potentially confounding variables such as neurosurgical procedure work relative value units (P = 0.13) or insurance provider (P = 0.26). There was no difference between the inpatient DCM per case for the institution for non-study patients (mean ± SD, $9039 ± $28,549) and study patients ($14,332 ± $20,231) (P = 0.4819). During the non-study period, there were a mean of 2.78 ± 1.65 pediatric brain tumor resections per month compared to 3.34 ± 1.66 cases per month during the study period, a 17% increase. When the 15 study patients were excluded, there were 2.97 ± 1.64 cases per month, a 7% increase. However, this increase in total case volume including study and non-study patients was not significant (P = 0.121). Phase I investigator-initiated surgically-based clinical trials may increase institutional surgical volume without imposing a financial burden. Finances are unlikely to be a barrier for researchers negotiating for resources to conduct such trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27864705What 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.