ArticleLung cancer management2020
Cost analysis of the management of brain metastases in patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC: alectinib versus crizotinib.
Article in Lung cancer management, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost of managing brain metastases in patients with ALK+ advanced NSCLC with first-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the UK.Lung cancer management · 2026Article
- Cost of managing brain metastases in ALK-positive advanced NSCLC patients receiving first-line ALK TKIs in China.Lung cancer management · 2026Article
- Economic burden of recurrence in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after curative-intent treatment in Spain.Health economics review · 2026Article
- Comparison of the effectiveness of alectinib versus crizotinib followed by alectinib in patients with ALK-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in real-world setting and in the ALEX study.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Article
- Comparison of Alectinib/Crizotinib Data in First-Line Therapy in Patients with Anaplastic LymphomakinasePositive Nonsmall Cell Lung Carcinoma with Poor Prognostic Features for Alectinib.Thoracic research and practice · 2023Article
- Cost-benefit analysis of ALK diagnosis vs. non-diagnosis in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer in Spain.Global & regional health technology assessmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo estimate management cost of NSCLC ALK+ patients with and without brain metastasis (BM), and to compare annual costs in patients treated with alectinib or crizotinib.
methodsManagement cost/year (€ 2018) in patients with and without BM was estimated with disaggregated resource consumption provided by local oncologists, including medical visits, hospitalizations, diagnostic/laboratory tests, imaging techniques and surgical procedures. The comparison of costs/year with alectinib and crizotinib, considered the cumulative 12-month incidence of BM in ALEX trial (9.4 and 41.4%, respectively).
resultsManagement cost was €6173.42/patient-year without BM and €21,637.50/patient-year with BM. With alectinib, average cost/patient was lower than crizotinib (€4948.51/patient-year).
conclusionPrevention of BM with alectinib may result in reductions of cost/year in the management of advanced ALK+ NSCLC.
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.