ArticleMolecular diagnosis & therapy2023
A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Biomarkers for Risk Prediction in Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- De-risking Atrial Fibrillation: Refining Anticoagulation Decision-Making.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2026Review
- Brazilian Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Article
- Biomarkers of increased bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation on oral anticoagulation: a narrative review.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2025Review
- Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleAtrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism. This risk is currently assessed with scoring systems based on clinical characteristics. However, these tools have limited prognostic performance. Circulating biomarkers are proposed for improved prediction of major clinical events and individualization of treatments in patients with AF.
objectiveThe aim was to assess the cost-effectiveness of precision medicine (PM), i.e., the use of combined biomarkers and clinical variables, in comparison to standard of care (SOC) for risk stratification in a hypothetical cohort of AF patients at risk of stroke.
methodsA Markov cohort model was developed to evaluate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of PM compared to SOC, over 20 years using a Canadian healthcare system perspective.
resultsPM decreased the mean per-patient overall costs by 7% ($94,932 vs $102,057 [Canadian dollars], respectively) and increased the QALYs by 12% (8.77 vs 7.68 QALYs, respectively). The calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative, indicating that PM is an economically dominant strategy. These results were robust to one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
conclusionPM compared to SOC is economically dominant and is projected to generate cost savings.
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.