ArticleBMC medicine2022
A cost-effectiveness analysis of capecitabine maintenance therapy versus routine follow-up for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer patients after standard treatment from a perspective of Chinese society.
Article in BMC medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the Dose of Standard Adjuvant Chemotherapy Affect the Triple-negative Breast Cancer Benefit from Extended Capecitabine Metronomic Therapy? An Exploratory Analysis of the SYSUCC-001 Trial.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2024Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of sacituzumab tirumotecan in previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in China.PloS one · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of antibody-drug conjugates in previously treated metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in China.Health economics review · 2025Article
- CCT196969 inhibits TNBC by targeting the HDAC5/RXRA/ASNS axis to down-regulate asparagine synthesis.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of sacituzumab govitecan for hormone receptor-positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer based on the EVER-132-002 trial in China.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Article
- Economics of first-line treatment with tislelizumab in patients with nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.Immunotherapy · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes biomarkers guiding chemotherapy de-escalation in early triple-negative breast cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Nanoformulations-Based Metronomic Chemotherapy: Mechanism, Challenges, Recent Advances, and Future Perspectives.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of adebrelimab combined with chemotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCapecitabine maintenance therapy is safe and efficacious for early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, but the cost-effectiveness of its long-term use has not been investigated. Here, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine maintenance therapy, compared with routine follow-up, in early-stage TNBC patients after standard treatment from a perspective of Chinese society.
methodsA three-state Markov model based on the data from the SYSUCC-001 trial was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine maintenance therapy in a month cycle over a period of 30-year time horizon. A 5% annual discount rate was set for all costs and benefits. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the model uncertainties. The main outcomes include quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one additional event.
resultsCompared with routine follow-up, 1-year capecitabine maintenance therapy yielded an additional 1.29 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) at an additional cost of $3391.70, with an ICER of $2630.53 (95% CI: $1159.81-$5090.12) per QALY gained. The ICER was considerably lower than the recommended willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold (i.e., $28,130.00 per QALY). The results were sensitive to the discount rate, drug cost, and treatment cost after relapse. Further, the NNT to prevent one additional relapse case was 29.2 (95% CI: 13.2-196.6), 16.7 (95% CI: 8.4-111.6), and 12.0 (95% CI: 5.7-82.6) at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively.
conclusionsOne-year capecitabine maintenance therapy for early-stage TNBC after standard treatment, compared with routine follow-up, was found to be highly cost-effective with promising clinical benefits and acceptable increased costs. Real-world studies are warranted to validate our findings in the future.
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.