ArticleFrontiers in public health2024
Modification of gemcitabine with oxaliplatin in China for unresectable gallbladder cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The incidence of gall bladder cancer (GBC), one of the most prevalent bile duct malignancies, differs with ethnicity and geographic location. To treat unresected GBC in the Chinese setting, this study aimed to assess the financial effectiveness of a combination of modified gemcitabine and oxaliplatin. Methods: Data from a randomized controlled study in which individuals with metastatic GBC were treated with oxaliplatin and gemcitabine demonstrated improved survival. A Markov model is built to calculate the incremental cost-benefit ratio (ICER) from the viewpoint of Chinese society on the basis of clinical symptoms and disease development. One-way certainty and probability sensitivity analyses are used to describe the uncertainty in the model. Results: Compared with those of fluorouracil (FU) and folinic acid, the utility value of modified oxaliplatin combined with gemcitabine increased by 0.22QALY throughout the course of the 10-year simulation (FA). In a Chinese healthcare setting, the cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $52765.59/QALY, with a 0% chance of cost-benefit at the WTP (willing-to-pay) level of $37697.00/QALY. The ICERs predicted by sensitivity analysis were not significantly affected by cost variations related to the management of Grade 3-4 AEs, the diagnostics used, or hospitalization expenditures. Conclusion: In a Chinese healthcare context, modified gemcitabine coupled with oxaliplatin (mGEMOX) is not a cost-effective treatment option for unresectable GBC.
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.