Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33959504›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Efficacy, Safety, and Cost-Minimization Analysis of Continuous Infusion of Low-Dose Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin in Patients With Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma.

Oscar Arrieta, Wendy Muñoz-Montaño, Sae Muñiz-Hernández, Saul Campos, Rodrigo Catalán, Herman Soto-Molina, Silvia Guzmán Vázquez, Osvaldo Díaz-Álvarez, Victor Martínez-Pacheco, Jenny G Turcott and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab plus ipilimumabTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2022
    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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Oscar ArrietaLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Wendy Muñoz-MontañoThoracic Oncology Unit, Instituto Nacional de Cancerologia, Mexico City, Mexico.
Sae Muñiz-HernándezLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Saul CamposDepartment of Medical Oncology, ISSEMYM, Toluca, Mexico.
Rodrigo CatalánLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Herman Soto-MolinaDepartment of Economic Evaluation, AMETSA, Mexico City, Mexico.
Silvia Guzmán VázquezDepartment of Economic Evaluation, AMETSA, Mexico City, Mexico.
Osvaldo Díaz-ÁlvarezDepartment of Economic Evaluation, AMETSA, Mexico City, Mexico.
Victor Martínez-PachecoDepartment of Economic Evaluation, AMETSA, Mexico City, Mexico.
Jenny G TurcottLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Maritza Ramos-RamírezLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Luis Cabrera-MirandaLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Feliciano BarrónLaboratory of Personalized Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Mexico City, Mexico.
Andrés F CardonaFoundation for Clinical and Applied Cancer Research (FICMAC), Bogotá, Colombia.
Instituto Nacional de Cancerología · MXFoundation for Clinical and Applied Cancer Research · COUniversidad Politécnica Metropolitana de Hidalgo · MX

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMalignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is rare and aggressive neoplasia, with a poor prognosis; furthermore, the monetary cost of its treatment represents a major challenge for many patients. The economic burden this malignancy imposes is underscored by the fact that asbestos exposure, which is the most frequent risk factor, is much more prevalent in the lower socioeconomic population of developing countries. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost of continuous infusion of low-dose Gemcitabine plus Cisplatin (CIGC) as a treatment strategy for patients with unresectable MPM.

methodsWe performed a prospective cohort study to determine efficacy and safety of continuous infusion gemcitabine at a dose of 250 mg/m2 in a 6-h continuous infusion plus cisplatin 35 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle in patients with unresectable MPM. We also performed a cost-minimization analysis to determine if this chemotherapy regimen is less expensive than other currently used regimens.

resultsThe median number of chemotherapy cycles was six (range 1-11 cycles); objective response rate was documented in 46.2%, and disease control rate was seen in 81.2%. Median PFS was 8.05 months (CI 95% 6.97-9.13); median OS was 16.16 months (CI 95% 12.5-19.9). The cost minimization analysis revealed savings of 66.4, 61.9, and 97.7% comparing CIGC with short-infusion gemcitabine plus cisplatin (SIGC), cisplatin plus pemetrexed (CP), and cisplatin plus pemetrexed and bevacizumab (CPB), respectively. Furthermore, this chemotherapy regimen proved to be safe at the administered dosage.

conclusionCIGC is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with unresectable MPM; besides, this combination is a cost-saving option when compared with other frequently used chemotherapy schemes. Therefore, this treatment scheme should be strongly considered for patients with unresectable MPM and limited economic resources.

Indexed as

chemotherapycisplatincost minimization analysislow-dose gemcitabinepleural mesotheliomaprolonged gemcitabine infusion

Identifiers

PMID33959504
PMCPMC8095245
OpenAlexW3154046046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.