Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37389878›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2023

Cost-Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy vs Open Radical Cystectomy for Patients With Bladder Cancer.

Simon Dixon, Harry Hill, Laura Flight, Pramit Khetrapal, Gareth Ambler, Norman R Williams, Chris Brew-Graves, John D Kelly, James W F Catto, iROC Study Team

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03049410 (A Phase III Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Robotically Assisted Radical Cystectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 4 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.

NCT03049410 nacompletednot on this map

A Phase III Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Robotically Assisted Radical Cystectomy (RARC) and Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion With Open Radical Cystectomy (ORC) in Patients With Bladder Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity College, LondonRan2017 to 2021Enrolled339ConditionsBladder CancerArmsIntracorporeal Robot Assisted Radical Cystectomy, Open Radical Cystectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

10 authors.

Simon DixonSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England.
Harry HillSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England.
Laura FlightSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England.
Pramit KhetrapalDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England.
Gareth AmblerDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, England.
Norman R WilliamsSurgical & Interventional Trials Unit, Division of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England.
Chris Brew-GravesDepartment of Statistical Science, University College London, London, England.
John D KellyDivision of Surgery & Interventional Science, University College London, London, England.
James W F CattoSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England.
iROC Study Team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: The value to payers of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion (iRARC) when compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer is unclear. Objectives: To compare the cost-effectiveness of iRARC with that of ORC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used individual patient data from a randomized clinical trial at 9 surgical centers in the United Kingdom. Patients with nonmetastatic bladder cancer were recruited from March 20, 2017, to January 29, 2020. The analysis used a health service perspective and a 90-day time horizon, with supplementary analyses exploring patient benefits up to 1 year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. Data were analyzed from January 13, 2022, to March 10, 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either iRARC (n = 169) or ORC (n = 169). Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs of surgery were calculated using surgery timings and equipment costs, with other hospital data based on counts of activity. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated from European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level instrument responses. Prespecified subgroup analyses were undertaken based on patient characteristics and type of diversion. Results: A total of 305 patients with available outcome data were included in the analysis, with a mean (SD) age of 68.3 (8.1) years, and of whom 241 (79.0%) were men. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy was associated with statistically significant reductions in admissions to intensive therapy (6.35% [95% CI, 0.42%-12.28%]), and readmissions to hospital (14.56% [95% CI, 5.00%-24.11%]), but increases in theater time (31.35 [95% CI, 13.67-49.02] minutes). The additional cost of iRARC per patient was £1124 (95% CI, -£576 to £2824 [US $1622 (95% CI, -$831 to $4075)]) with an associated gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.01124 (95% CI, 0.00391-0.01857). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £100 008 (US $144 312) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy had a much higher probability of being cost-effective for subgroups defined by age, tumor stage, and performance status. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of surgery for patients with bladder cancer, iRARC reduced short-term morbidity and some associated costs. While the resulting cost-effectiveness ratio was in excess of thresholds used by many publicly funded health systems, patient subgroups were identified for which iRARC had a high probability of being cost-effective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03049410.

Indexed as

RoboticsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAgedCost-Benefit AnalysisCystectomyFemaleHumansMaleQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID37389878
PMCPMC10314306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.