Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37811793›Full record

ArticleMedical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Therapy Sequence in Advanced Cancer: A Microsimulation Approach with Application to Metastatic Prostate Cancer.

Elizabeth A Handorf, J Robert Beck, Andres Correa, Chethan Ramamurthy, Daniel M Geynisman

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. A Scoping Review on Calibration Methods for Cancer Simulation Models.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2025
    Article
  4. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth A HandorfRutgers University School of Public Health, Cancer Institute of New Jersey, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0445-8978
J Robert BeckFox Chase Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Philadelphia, PA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6673-3205
Andres CorreaDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Chethan RamamurthyDivision Hematology/Oncology, Mays Cancer Center UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Daniel M GeynismanDepartment of Hematology/Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Fox Chase Cancer Center · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · US

Funding

WORD PROCESSING CENTER--COREP30CA006927 · NCI · RESEARCH INST OF FOX CHASE CAN CTR · PI Eric Andrew Ross · 1985 to 2026
$138.8M
TUFCCC/HC Regional Comprehensive Cancer Health PartnershipU54CA221705 · NCI · TEMPLE UNIV OF THE COMMONWEALTH · PI GRACE X. MA · 2018 to 2026
$16.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA006927NCI NIH HHS U54 CA221705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePatients with advanced cancer may undergo multiple lines of treatment, switching therapies as their disease progresses. We developed a general microsimulation framework to study therapy sequence and applied it to metastatic prostate cancer.

methodsWe constructed a discrete-time state transition model to study 2 lines of therapy. Using digitized published survival curves (progression-free survival, time to progression, and overall survival [OS]), we inferred event types (progression or death) and estimated transition probabilities using cumulative incidence functions with competing risks. We incorporated within-patient dependence over time; first-line therapy response informed subsequent event probabilities. Parameters governing within-patient dependence calibrated the model-based results to a target clinical trial. We applied these methods to 2 therapy sequences for metastatic prostate cancer, wherein both docetaxel (DCT) and abiraterone acetate (AA) are appropriate for either first- or second-line treatment. We assessed costs and quality-adjusted life-years (5-y QALYs) for 2 treatment strategies: DCT → AA versus AA → DCT.

resultsModels assuming within-patient independence overestimated OS time, which corrected with the calibration approach. With generic pricing, AA → DCT dominated DCT → AA, (higher 5-y QALYs and lower costs), consistent for all values of calibration parameters (including no correction). Model calibration increased the difference in 5-y QALYs between treatment strategies (0.07 uncorrected v. 0.15 with base-case correction). Applying the correction decreased the estimated difference in cost (-$5,360 uncorrected v. -$3,066 corrected). Results were strongly affected by the cost of AA. Under a lifetime horizon, AA → DCT was no longer dominant but still cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $19,463).

conclusionsWe demonstrate a microsimulation approach to study the cost-effectiveness of therapy sequences for advanced prostate cancer, taking care to account for within-patient dependence. HIGHLIGHTS: We developed a discrete-time state transition model for studying therapy sequence in advanced cancers.Results are sensitive to dependence within patients.A calibration approach can introduce dependence across lines of therapy and closely match simulation outcomes to target trial outcomes.

Indexed as

Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisProstatic NeoplasmsCost-Benefit AnalysisDocetaxelHumansMaleQuality-Adjusted Life YearsDocetaxelcalibrationmicrosimulation modeltherapy sequence

Identifiers

PMID37811793
PMCPMC10840915
OpenAlexW4387439762

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.