ArticleEuropean urology open science2022
Trial-based Cost-effectiveness Analysis of an Immediate Postoperative Mitomycin C Instillation in Patients with Non-muscle-invasive Bladder Cancer.
Article in European urology open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBladder cancer imposes a significant public health burden on the European Union. There is a need for cost-effective treatment and follow-up regimens.
objectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of immediate mitomycin C (MMC) instillation within 1 d after surgery compared to delayed MMC instillation within 2 wk after surgery with further adjuvant treatment, depending on the patient's risk group. DESIGN SETTING AND
participantsThis economic evaluation was based on a randomized controlled trial among 2243 Dutch patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) patients from a health care perspective over a 3-yr time period. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The treatment effect was measured as time to recurrence and recurrence-free survival. Missing effect data were imputed with multiple imputation. Health care utilization and related costs were estimated on the basis of treatment protocols for NMIBC patients in the Netherlands. Statistical uncertainty was estimated using bootstrapping and is graphically presented using cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Time to recurrence was significantly longer for immediate MMC instillation (27.31 mo) than for delayed MMC instillation (24.97 mo), with an adjusted mean difference of 2.21 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58-2.84). The proportion of patients with recurrence-free survival was significantly higher after immediate MMC instillation (0.65) than after delayed MMC instillation (0.56), with an adjusted mean difference of 0.08 (95% CI 0.06-0.11). Total mean health care costs per patient were significantly lower for immediate MMC instillation (€22 959) than for delayed MMC instillation (€24 624), with an adjusted mean difference of -€1350 (95% CI -€1799 to -€900). The study is limited by the retrospective estimation of costs.
conclusionsThis trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis shows that from a health care perspective, immediate MMC instillation is more effective and less expensive compared to delayed MMC instillation. PATIENT SUMMARY: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of immediate bladder instillation of mitomycin C after surgery to reduce the risk of recurrence after removal of the bladder tumor as compared to delayed instillation in a large Dutch population of patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. We found that immediate instillation was more effective and less expensive than delayed instillation. We conclude that immediate mitomycin C instillation is a cost-effective treatment for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.