Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28819067›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Health economics of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) for early breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United Kingdom.

Anil Vaidya, Param Vaidya, Brigitte Both, Chris Brew-Graves, Max Bulsara, Jayant S Vaidya

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The evolution of targeted intra operative radiotherapy in early breast cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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 at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Anil VaidyaSchool of Public Health, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Param VaidyaO-ZONE 2.0 Inc. HEOR Consultancy, Edmonton, Canada.
Brigitte BothCarl-Zeiss Meditec AG, Oberkochen, Germany.
Chris Brew-GravesDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Max BulsaraInstitute for Health Research, University of Notre Dame, Fremantle, Australia.
Jayant S VaidyaDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
University College London · GBThe University of Notre Dame Australia · AUUniversity of Alberta · CAWitten/Herdecke University · DE

Funding

Department of Health 07/60/49Department of Health 10/104/07Department of Health 14/49/13Department of Health HTA/14/49/13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe clinical effectiveness of targeted intraoperative radiotherapy (TARGIT-IORT) has been confirmed in the randomised TARGIT-A (targeted intraoperative radiotherapy-alone) trial to be similar to a several weeks' course of whole-breast external-beam radiation therapy (EBRT) in patients with early breast cancer. This study aims to determine the cost-effectiveness of TARGIT-IORT to inform policy decisions about its wider implementation.

settingTARGIT-A randomised clinical trial (ISRCTN34086741) which compared TARGIT with traditional EBRT and found similar breast cancer control, particularly when TARGIT was given simultaneously with lumpectomy.

methodsCost-utility analysis using decision analytic modelling by a Markov model. A cost-effectiveness Markov model was developed using TreeAge Pro V.2015. The decision analytic model compared two strategies of radiotherapy for breast cancer in a hypothetical cohort of patients with early breast cancer based on the published health state transition probability data from the TARGIT-A trial. Analysis was performed for UK setting and National Health Service (NHS) healthcare payer's perspective using NHS cost data and treatment outcomes were simulated for both strategies for a time horizon of 10 years. Model health state utilities were drawn from the published literature. Future costs and effects were discounted at the rate of 3.5%. To address uncertainty, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

main outcome measuresQuality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

resultsIn the base case analysis, TARGIT-IORT was a highly cost-effective strategy yielding health gain at a lower cost than its comparator EBRT. Discounted TARGIT-IORT and EBRT costs for the time horizon of 10 years were £12 455 and £13 280, respectively. TARGIT-IORT gained 0.18 incremental QALY as the discounted QALYs gained by TARGIT-IORT were 8.15 and by EBRT were 7.97 showing TARGIT-IORT as a dominant strategy over EBRT. Model outputs were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

conclusionsTARGIT-IORT is a dominant strategy over EBRT, being less costly and producing higher QALY gain. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN34086741; post results.

Indexed as

Mastectomy, SegmentalRadiotherapy, AdjuvantAdultBreast NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansIntraoperative CareMarkov ChainsMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPolicy MakingQuality-Adjusted Life YearsTreatment OutcomeUnited Kingdomhealth economics

Identifiers

PMID28819067
PMCPMC5724101
OpenAlexW2745882165

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.