ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2019
Cost-utility analysis of 21-gene assay for node-positive early breast cancer.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tumour profiling tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in lymph node-positive early breast cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Oncotype DX: Clinical Utility, Evidence, and Future Trends in Personalized Breast Cancer Management.International journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Impact of the 21-gene expression assay on treatment decisions and clinical outcomes in breast cancer with one to three positive lymph nodes.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Impact of the 21-Gene Recurrence Score Assay on Treatment Decisions and Cost in Patients with Node-Positive Breast Cancer: A Multicenter Study in Quebec.The oncologist · 2022Observational
- Promoter methylation of transient receptor potential melastatin-related 7 (TRPM7) predicts a better prognosis in patients with Luminal A breast cancers.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- The Role of the 21-Gene Recurrence ScoreCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Review
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence ScoreClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2022Article
- Master Protocols for Precision Medicine in Oncology: Overcoming Methodology of Randomized Clinical Trials.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Practice-Changing Use of the 21-Gene Test for the Management of Patients With Early-Stage Breast Cancer in Latin America.JCO global oncology · 2021Article
- Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Early-Stage Invasive Breast Cancer: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: For women with lymph node (ln)-positive, estrogen receptor-positive, and her2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2)-negative breast cancer (bca), current guidelines recommend treatment with both hormonal therapy and chemotherapy. The 21-gene Recurrence Score (rs) assay might be helpful in selecting patients with bca who can be spared chemotherapy when they have 1-3 positive lns and a lower risk of recurrence. In the present study, we performed a cost-utility analysis comparing use of the 21-gene rs assay with current practice from the perspective of a Canadian health care payer. Methods: A Markov model was developed to determine costs and quality-adjusted life-years (qalys) over a patient's lifetime. Patient outcomes in both study groups were examined based on published clinical trials. Costs were derived primarily from published Canadian sources. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 1.5% annually, and costs are reported in 2016 Canadian dollars. A probabilistic analysis was used, and the model parameters were varied in a sensitivity analysis. Results: The results indicate that use of the 21-gene rs assay was less costly ($432 less) and more effective (0.22 qalys) than current practice. The probabilistic analysis revealed that 70% of the 10,000 simulated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were in the southeast quadrant. The results were sensitive to the probability of a low rs and to the probability of receiving chemotherapy in the low-risk rs category and in current practice. Conclusions: Use of the 21-gene rs assay could be a cost-effective strategy for Ontario patients with estrogen receptor-positive, her2-negative early bca and 1-3 positive lns.
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.