ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2024
Resources Utilization Assessment and Cost-Minimization Analysis of the 6-Monthly Formulation of Triptorelin in the Treatment of Prostate Cancer in China.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of degarelix versus LHRH agonists in prostate cancer: a systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Prostate Cancer can be treated with various formulations of Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonists (GnRHa), but cost analyses of these treatments in China are lacking. This study aims to evaluate the differences in cost and resource utilization between various formulations of GnRHa for Prostate Cancer by conducting a resource utilization assessment and cost minimization analysis. Methods: From the perspective of society and medical healthcare, this study used the cost minimization model to generate cost and resource estimates for GnRHa drug acquisition and administration for "Current practice" and for a "Base case" scenario. In the "Base case" scenario, all of the patients who were receiving 1-monthly or 3-monthly GnRHa therapy in "Current practice" switched to a 6-monthly formulation triptorelin. Cost/Resource estimates were calculated per patient per administration and scaled to annualized population levels. Deterministic sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the uncertainty of the model variables and applied assumptions. Results: From a societal perspective, if all 1-monthly and 3-monthly formulations of GnRHa were switched to a 6-monthly formulation triptorelin, it is conservatively estimated that the annual societal cost could be reduced by ¥13,382,951.13, with an average annual cost savings of ¥46.53 per patient. Additionally, the 6-monthly formulation could save 3,608,973.91 hours annually, translating to an average time savings of 12.55 hours per patient, reducing treatment time by 78%. From a healthcare system perspective, if the introduction of the 6-monthly formulation of GnRHa is delayed, it would lead to an annual increase of ¥94 million in medical costs, and require an additional 64,445.96 working days for doctors and nurses. Deterministic sensitivity analysis demonstrated the model's robustness, showing the 6-monthly GnRHa remains cost-effective across various parameter changes, with drug price being the most influential factor. Conclusion: Compared to current 1-monthly and 3-monthly formulations, the 6-monthly GnRHa can reduce the total burden associated with prostate cancer treatment.
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.