ArticleCancers2024
Patient-Relevant Costs for Organ Preservation versus Radical Resection in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic Evaluation of 'Watch and Wait' Following Neoadjuvant Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Quality of life in cancer patients at the end of radiotherapy compared to a general population sample in Germany.International journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Quality of life following total neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Implementation of Organ Preservation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer in Canada: A National Survey of Clinical Practice.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Versus Conventional Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: Cost Analysis in a Public Healthcare System.ANZ journal of surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is an evolving treatment schedule for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), allowing for organ preservation in a relevant number of patients in the case of complete response. Patients who undergo this so-called "watch and wait" approach are likely to benefit regarding their quality of life (QoL), especially if definitive ostomy could be avoided. In this work, we performed the first cost-effectiveness analysis from the patient perspective to compare costs for TNT with radical resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CRT) in the German health care system. Individual costs for patients insured with a statutory health insurance were calculated with a Markov microsimulation. A subgroup analysis from the prospective "FinTox" trial was used to calibrate the model's parameters. We found that TNT was less expensive (-1540 EUR) and simultaneously resulted in a better QoL (+0.64 QALYs) during treatment and 5-year follow-up. The average cost for patients under TNT was 4711 EUR per year, which was equivalent to 3.2% of the net household income. CRT followed by resection resulted in higher overall costs for ostomy care, medication and greater loss of earnings. Overall, TNT appeared to be more efficacious and cost-effective from a patient's point of view in the German health care system.
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.