ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2024
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2024. 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Weighing the evidence on costs and benefits of polygenic risk-based approaches in clinical practice: A systematic review of economic evaluations.American journal of human genetics · 2025Pooled it
- Multi-modal AI for comprehensive breast cancer prognostication.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Experiences accessing and receiving tumour genetic profiling in Victoria: a consumer-led cross-sectional survey study.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Deep learning on histopathological images to predict breast cancer recurrence risk and chemotherapy benefit: a multicentre, model development and validation study.The Lancet. Oncology · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence ScoreBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Financial De-Escalation in T1 Breast Cancers With the Low Magee Equation: An Experience From A Single Institution Without Genomic Testing.European journal of breast health · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of gene-expression-based prognostic tests for patients with early-stage breast cancer in South Korea.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Article
- Liquid Biopsies in Head and Neck Cancers: Recent Developments Across Biofluids, Analytes, and Molecular Features.Head & neck · 2025Review
- Article
- Oncotype DX in clinical practice: impact on treatment decisions and healthcare system economy.Pathologica · 2025Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Multigene Assays to Guide Treatment Decisions for Node-Negative Early Breast Cancer.Oncology and therapy · 2025Article
- The prognostic value of the tumor-stroma ratio compared to tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in triple-negative breast cancer: a review.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2025Review
- Predictive and prognostic biomarkers in cancer: towards the precision medicine era.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The 21-gene assay (the Oncotype DX Breast Recurrence Score Materials and Methods: A cost-effectiveness model consisted of a decision-tree to stratify patients according to their Recurrence Score (RS) results and the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, followed by a Markov component to estimate the long-term costs and outcomes of the chosen treatment. Distributions of patients and distant recurrence probabilities were derived from the TAILORx (N0) and RxPONDER (N1) trials. The model was evaluated from a healthcare payer and societal perspective. Endocrine therapy and chemotherapy use were informed using clinical expert opinion to reflect US clinical practice and were combined with Medicare drug costs (2021) to estimate the cost of treatment. Societal costs included lost productivity and patient out-of-pocket costs obtained from literature. Results: The Oncotype DX test generated more quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (N0: 0.25; N1: 0.08) at a lower cost (N0: -$13,395; N1: -$2526) compared to clinical-pathological risk alone from a societal cost perspective. The overall conclusions from the model did not change when considering a payer perspective. The main cost drivers were avoidance of distant recurrence for N0 (-$12,578), and the cost of adjuvant chemotherapy for N1 (-$2133). Lost productivity had a major impact in the societal perspective analysis (N0: -$4607; N1: -$1586). Conclusion: Adjuvant chemotherapy decisions based on the RS result led to more life year gains and lower healthcare costs (dominant) compared to using clinical-pathological risk factors alone among patients with HR+/HER2- N0 and N1 early-stage breast cancer.
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.