Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34950969›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2022

[

Francesca Spada, Davide Campana, Giuseppe Lamberti, Riccardo Laudicella, Renato Dellamano, Luca Dellamano, Oscar Leeuwenkamp, Sergio Baldari

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Predicting the Response of Patients Treated withJournal of medical signals and sensors · 2024
    Article
  3. Prospective Evaluation ofCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023
    Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. [Cancers · 2022
    Article
  7. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Francesca SpadaDivision of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology and Neuroendocrine Tumors, European Institute of Oncology (IEO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Davide CampanaDivision of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Via P. Albertoni 15, 40138, Bologna, Italy.
Giuseppe LambertiDivision of Medical Oncology, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Via P. Albertoni 15, 40138, Bologna, Italy.
Riccardo LaudicellaNuclear Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and of Morpho-Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Viale Consolare Valeria n.1, Messina, Italy.
Renato DellamanoValueVector, Milan, Italy.
Luca DellamanoValueVector, Milan, Italy.
Oscar LeeuwenkampAdvanced Accelerator Applications/A Novartis Company, Geneva, Switzerland.
Sergio BaldariNuclear Medicine Unit, Department of Biomedical and Dental Sciences and of Morpho-Functional Imaging, University of Messina, Viale Consolare Valeria n.1, Messina, Italy. sergio.baldari@unime.it.
Azienda USL di Bologna · ITUniversity of Messina · ITEuropean Institute of Oncology · ITNovartis (Switzerland) · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess and compare clinical outcomes and costs, to the Italian healthcare system, of three therapeutic options approved in the management of adult patients with gastro-enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs).

methodsWe compared the efficacy, safety, and costs of [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE, everolimus (both originator and generic products), and sunitinib in patients with advanced GEP-NETs (NET G1 and G2) that had progressed following treatment with somatostatin analogs (SSAs). A cost-consequence model was developed and validated by a panel of clinical experts from three NET reference centres in Italy. The clinical outcomes included in the model were median progression-free survival and the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs), as reported in pivotal clinical trials. The costs for acquisition and administration of each treatment, and of managing AEs, were calculated from the perspective of the Italian national health service. Treatment costs per progression-free month were calculated separately for patients with NETs of pancreatic (PanNETs; all three treatments) and gastrointestinal (GI-NETs; [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE and everolimus only) origin.

resultsIn patients with PanNETs, total costs per progression-free month were €2989 for [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE, €4975 for originator everolimus, €3472 for generic everolimus, and €5337 for sunitinib. In patients with GI-NETs, total costs per progression-free month were €3189 for [177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE, €4990 for originator everolimus, and €3483 for generic everolimus.

conclusions[177Lu]Lu-DOTA-TATE was associated with lower costs per progression-free month versus relevant treatment options in patients with GI-NETs or PanNETs (NET G1-G2; progressed following SSA treatment), although acquisition and administration costs are higher. These findings provide further economic arguments in the overall context of treatment decision-making.

Indexed as

Neuroendocrine TumorsOrganometallic CompoundsAdultEverolimusHeterocyclic Compounds, 1-RingHospitalsHumansOctreotideStandard of CareState MedicineSunitinib1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane- 1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acidEverolimusHeterocyclic Compounds, 1-RingOctreotideOrganometallic CompoundsSunitinibCost-consequence analysis; EverolimusGastro-enteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumourHealthcare costsItalyLutetiumPeptide receptor radionuclide therapyProgression-free survivalSomatostatin receptor agonistsSunitinib

Identifiers

PMID34950969
PMCPMC9016001
OpenAlexW4225418351

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.