Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32648979›Full record

ArticleCancer2020

Productivity costs associated with metastatic breast cancer in younger, midlife, and older women.

Justin G Trogdon, Xuejun Liu, Katherine E Reeder-Hayes, Jason Rotter, Donatus U Ekwueme, Stephanie B Wheeler

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacologic Treatment Options for Women With Endocrine-Refractory or Triple-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Article
  9. A systemmatic literature review on indirect costs of women with breast cancer.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2022
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Justin G TrogdonDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-5484-7870
Xuejun LiuDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Katherine E Reeder-HayesLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0001-6903-0177
Jason RotterDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0002-4386-332X
Donatus U EkwuemeDivision of Cancer Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Stephanie B WheelerDepartment of Health Policy and Management, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

Center for Health Promotion and Disease PreventionU48DP005017 · DP · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI AMMERMAN, ALICE S, WHEELER, STEPHANIE BROOKE · 2014 to 2018
$10.9M
CDC HHS 5-U48-DP005017-04-01 (PIs: Trogdon and Wheeler)Intramural CDC HHS CC999999NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP005017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe objective of the current study was to estimate productivity costs due to metastatic breast cancer (mBC) via productive time lost among survivors and potential life-years lost from premature mortality among 3 age groups: younger (aged 18-44 years), midlife (aged 45-64 years), and older (aged ≥65 years) women.

methodsThe authors estimated the number of work and home productivity days missed due to mBC by age group using data from the 2000 to 2016 National Health Interview Survey. Years of potential life lost (YPLL) due to mBC were calculated for each age group using 2015 National Vital Statistics System data. The authors valued both sources of lost productivity time using the Current Population Survey and prior studies.

resultsThe per-woman value of lost productive days (work and home) due to mBC ranged from $680 for older women to $5169 for younger women. In 2015, the value of lost work and home productivity days associated with mBC nationally was $67 million for younger women, $246 million for midlife women, and $66 million for older women. YPLL were highest among midlife women (403,786 life-years), followed by older women (248,522 life-years) and younger women (95,943 life-years). Midlife women were found to have the highest market value of YPLL ($4.1 billion), followed by younger women ($1.6 billion) and older women ($527 million).

conclusionsThe results of the current study demonstrated that mBC generates a high economic burden through lost productivity, especially among midlife women.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisYoung Adultbreast cancereconomic burdenmetastaticproductivity costsyears of potential life lost

Identifiers

PMID32648979
PMCPMC7721964
OpenAlexW3009650965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.