Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36033760›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Benefit-to-harm ratio and cost-effectiveness of government-recommended gastric cancer screening in China: A modeling study.

Shuxia Qin, Xuehong Wang, Sini Li, Chongqing Tan, Xiaohui Zeng, Meiyu Wu, Ye Peng, Liting Wang, Xiaomin Wan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Health economic evaluation on population-basedChinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2023
    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

9 authors.

Shuxia QinDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Xuehong WangDepartment of Gastroenterology, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Sini LiXiangya Nursing School, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Chongqing TanDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Xiaohui ZengPET-CT Center, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Meiyu WuDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Ye PengDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Liting WangDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Xiaomin WanDepartment of Pharmacy, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Current guidelines recommend the gastric cancer risk score scale (GCRSS) for screening in gastric cancer (GC) high-risk populations in China. This study aimed to estimate the clinical benefits, harms, cost, and cost-effectiveness of the GCRSS screening strategy from a Chinese healthcare system perspective. Materials and methods: Using a microsimulation model, we evaluated 7 screening scenarios of the GCRSS with varying starting ages. We simulated 100,000 individuals from the age of 20 for each screening scenario. The main outcomes included GC incidence reduction, number of cause-specific deaths, costs, quality-adjusted life year (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and benefit-to-harm ratio. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were done to explore the robustness of model findings. Results: Screening with the GCRSS strategy at the age of 40 years (40-GCRSS) provided the greatest reduction of GC incidence by 70.6%, with 7,374 GC deaths averted per 100,000 individuals and the lowest benefit-to-harm ratio of 0.392. Compared with no screening or previous less costly strategy, at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $37,655 per QALY, the 40-GCRSS strategy was cost-effective, with ICERs of $12,586 and $29,115 per QALY, respectively. Results were robust across univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The 40-GCRSS strategy showed a 0.856 probability of being cost-effective at a $37,655 per QALY WTP threshold. Conclusions: The findings suggest that the GCRSS strategy is effective and cost-effective in reducing the GC disease burden in China from a Chinese healthcare system perspective. Screening from the age of 40 would be the optimal strategy.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerStomach NeoplasmsAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisGovernmentHumansQuality-Adjusted Life Yearsbenefit-to-harm ratiocost-effectivenessendoscopygastric cancermodelingscreening

Identifiers

PMID36033760
PMCPMC9399635

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.