Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35701687›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2022

Clinical Benefit and Cost Effectiveness of Risk-Stratified Gastric Cancer Screening Strategies in China: A Modeling Study.

Shuxia Qin, Xuehong Wang, Sini Li, Chongqing Tan, Xiaohui Zeng, Xia Luo, Lidan Yi, Liubao Peng, Meiyu Wu, Ye Peng and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. 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

12 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Shuxia QinDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Xuehong WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Sini LiXiangya Nursing School, Central South University, Changsha, 410013, Hunan, China.
Chongqing TanDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Xiaohui ZengPET-CT Center, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Xia LuoDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Lidan YiDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Liubao PengDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Meiyu WuDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Ye PengDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Liting WangDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China.
Xiaomin WanDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China. wanxiaomin@csu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5315-8141
Central South University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveA new gastric cancer screening scoring system (NGCS) strategy was recommended for the early gastric cancer (GC) screening process in China. The current study aimed to assess the clinical benefits and the cost effectiveness of the NGCS strategy in GC high-risk areas of China from a societal perspective.

methodsA Markov microsimulation model was developed to evaluate 30 alternative screening strategies with varying initiation age, including the NGCS strategy, the modified NGCS strategy, and the endoscopic screening strategy with various screening intervals. The primary outcomes included GC mortality, number of endoscopies, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Cost estimates were reported in 2021 USD (US$) and both costs and benefits were discounted at 5% annually. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate model uncertainty.

resultsScreening with the NGCS strategy from age 40 years (40-NGCS) reduced the GC incidence by 86.4%, which provided the greatest benefit across strategies. Compared with all strategies, at a willingness-to pay threshold of US$17,922 per QALY, the 40-NGCS strategy was a leading cost-effective strategy, with an ICER of US$15,668 per QALY. Results were robust in univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The probability of the 40-NGCS strategy being cost effective was 0.863.

conclusionsThe 40-NGCS strategy was an effective and cost-effective strategy to reduce GC incidence and mortality in China. The findings provide important evidence for decision makers to formulate and optimize targeted approaches for GC prevention and control policies in China.

Indexed as

Stomach NeoplasmsAdultChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisEarly Detection of CancerHumansMass ScreeningQuality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

PMID35701687
OpenAlexW4282922079

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.