Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36408078›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia2022

Catastrophic expenditure and treatment attrition in patients seeking comprehensive colorectal cancer treatment in India: A prospective multicentre study.

CROCODILE study group

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

1 author at 1 institution.

CROCODILE study group
All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although colorectal cancer is increasing in India, the cost of comprehensive treatment and its consequences for patients and households are unknown. This study aimed to describe catastrophic expenditure and treatment attrition in patients with a treatment plan for colorectal cancer. Methods: A prospective, multicentre, cohort study was conducted in five tertiary hospitals in India from December 2020 to March 2022. Consecutive patients with a new treatment plan for colorectal cancer were followed-up for six months. The total cost of treatment was reported, including out-of-pocket payments (OOPP, paid by patients at the time-of-service use) and covered by third parties (insurance, public funds). The primary outcome was catastrophic expenditure, defined as OOPPs greater than 25% of patient's annual household income and the secondary outcome was treatment attrition, defined as unplanned interruption of the treatment course not recommended by the clinical team. Findings: Of 226 patients included, 20 died within six months of being offered a treatment plan and four were lost to follow-up. The median total cost of colorectal cancer treatment was 407,508 Indian Rupees (INR/5340 USD), to which the biggest contributor was the patient's OOPP (median 330,277 INR/4328 USD). Surgery and anaesthesia costs (median 85,944 INR/1126 USD) were higher than radiotherapy (median 55,525 INR/728 USD) and chemotherapy (median 14,780 INR/194 USD). The overall catastrophic expenditure rate was 90.1% (182/202) and the treatment attrition rate was 9.4% (19/202). Patients with treatment attrition made lower OOPPs than those who completed treatment (median 205,926 vs 349,398 INR, Interpretation: Most treatment costs for colorectal cancer were paid out-of-pocket by patients and catastrophic expenditure was common. Treatment attrition rates at tertiary centres were low, suggesting greater attrition at previous stages of care. Better financial protection may allow more patients to receive comprehensive cancer treatment while avoiding household financial catastrophe. Funding: This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (NIHR 16.136.79) using UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research, by the India Institute of the University of Birmingham and by the Global Challenges program of the University of Birmingham. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK government.

Indexed as

CancerCatastrophic expenditureColorectal cancerIndiaTreatment attrition

Identifiers

PMID36408078
PMCPMC9664978
OpenAlexW4300970005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.