Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34379649›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Excess cost of care associated with sepsis in cancer patients: Results from a population-based case-control matched cohort.

Michelle Tew, Kim Dalziel, Karin Thursky, Murray Krahn, Lusine Abrahamyan, Andrew M Morris, Philip Clarke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Healthcare costs after sepsis: a systematic review.Critical care (London, England) · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Michelle TewCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3009-8056
Kim DalzielCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Karin ThurskyNational Centre for Infections in Cancer, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Murray KrahnToronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Lusine AbrahamyanToronto Health Economics and Technology Assessment Collaborative, Toronto General Hospital Research Institute, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Andrew M MorrisDepartment of Medicine, Division of Infectious Disease, Sinai Health, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Philip ClarkeCentre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
The University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Toronto · CAThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUUniversity Health Network · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer patients are at significant risk of developing sepsis due to underlying malignancy and necessary treatments. Little is known about the economic burden of sepsis in this high-risk population. We estimate the short- and long-term healthcare costs of care of cancer patients with and without sepsis using individual-level linked-administrative data.

methodsWe conducted a population-based matched cohort study of cancer patients aged ≥18, diagnosed between 2010 and 2017. Cases were identified if diagnosed with sepsis during the study period, and were matched 1:1 by age, sex, cancer type and other variables to controls without sepsis. Mean costs (2018 Canadian dollars) for patients with and without sepsis up to 5 years were estimated adjusted using survival probabilities at partitioned intervals. We estimated excess cost associated with sepsis presented as a cost difference between the two cohorts. Haematological and solid cancers were analysed separately.

results77,483 cancer patients with sepsis were identified and matched. 64.3% of the cohort were aged ≥65, 46.3% female and 17.8% with haematological malignancies. Among solid tumour patients, the excess cost of care among patients who developed sepsis was $29,081 (95%CI, $28,404-$29,757) in the first year, rising to $60,714 (95%CI, $59,729-$61,698) over 5 years. This was higher for haematology patients; $46,154 (95%CI, $45,505-$46,804) in year 1, increasing to $75,931 (95%CI, $74,895-$76,968).

conclusionsSepsis imposes substantial economic burden and can result in a doubling of cancer care costs, particularly during the first year of cancer diagnosis. These estimates are helpful in improving our understanding of burden of sepsis along the cancer pathway and to deploy targeted strategies to alleviate this burden.

Indexed as

Cost of IllnessHealth Care CostsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge DistributionCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsSepsisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34379649
PMCPMC8357157
OpenAlexW3190506780

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.