Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34337517›Full record

ReviewEuropean urology open science2021

Health Economic Evidence for Liquid- and Tissue-based Molecular Tests that Inform Decisions on Prostate Biopsies and Treatment of Localised Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Koen Degeling, Amanda Pereira-Salgado, Niall M Corcoran, Paul C Boutros, Peter Kuhn, Maarten J IJzerman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European urology open science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
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.

Koen DegelingCancer Health Services Research, Centre for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Amanda Pereira-SalgadoCancer Health Services Research, Centre for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Niall M CorcoranDepartment of Urology, Frankston Hospital, Frankston, Australia.
Paul C BoutrosEli and Edythe Broad Center of Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Peter KuhnUSC Michelson Center for Convergent Biosciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Maarten J IJzermanCancer Health Services Research, Centre for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

UCLA SPORE in Brain CancerP50CA211015 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI Yvonne Yu-Hsuan Chen · 2017 to 2026
$25.2M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA211015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextSeveral liquid- and tissue-based biomarker tests (LTBTs) are available to inform the need for prostate biopsies and treatment of localised prostate cancer (PCa) through risk stratification, but translation into routine practice requires evidence of their clinical utility and economic impact.

objectiveTo review and summarise the health economic evidence on the ability of LTBTs to inform decisions on prostate biopsies and treatment of localised PCa through risk stratification. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic search was performed in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Health Technology Assessment, and National Health Service Health Economic Evaluation databases. Eligible publications were those presenting health economic evaluations of an LTBT to select individuals for biopsy or risk-stratify PCa patients for treatment. Data on the study objectives, context, methodology, clinical utility, and outcomes were extracted and summarised. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of the 22 studies included, 14 were focused on test-informed biopsies and eight on treatment selection. Most studies performed cost-effectiveness analyses (

conclusionsAlthough studies concluded that LTBTs would probably be cost-saving or -effective, the strength of this evidence is disputable because of concerns around the validity and transparency of the assumptions made. This warrants prospective interventional trials to inform health economic analyses to ensure collection of direct evidence of clinical outcomes based on LTBT use. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed studies that evaluated whether blood, urine, and tissue tests can reduce the health and economic burden of prostate cancer. Results indicate that these tests could be cost-effective, but clinical studies of long-term outcomes are needed to confirm the findings.

Indexed as

BiomarkerBlood testBudget impactCostCost-effectivenessHealth economicsLiquid biopsyLocalised prostate cancerTissue-based testUrine test

Identifiers

PMID34337517
PMCPMC8317795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.