Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39839194›Full record

ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2025

Cost-Benefit Analysis of in vivo Reflectance Confocal Microscopy for Melanoma Diagnosis in a Real-World Clinical Setting.

Giacomo Matteo Bruno, Sergio Di Matteo, Caterina Longo, Ignazio Stanganelli, Francesca Farnetani, Stefania Borsari, Laura Mazzoni, Silavana Ciardo, Margherita Raucci, Serena Magi and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

18 authors.

Giacomo Matteo BrunoDepartment of Drug Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-4571-654X
Sergio Di MatteoS.A.V.E. Studi Analisi Valutazioni Economiche S.r.l., Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Milan, Italy.
Caterina Longo *Azienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Skin Cancer Center, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Ignazio Stanganelli *Skin Cancer Unit, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) "Dino Amadori", Meldola, Italy.
Francesca FarnetaniDermatology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Dental & Morphological Sciences with Interest Transplant, Oncological & Regenerative Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 41125, Italy.
Stefania BorsariAzienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Skin Cancer Center, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Laura MazzoniSkin Cancer Unit, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) "Dino Amadori", Meldola, Italy.
Silavana CiardoDermatology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Dental & Morphological Sciences with Interest Transplant, Oncological & Regenerative Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 41125, Italy.
Margherita RaucciAzienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Skin Cancer Center, Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Serena MagiSkin Cancer Unit, IRCCS Istituto Romagnolo per lo Studio dei Tumori (IRST) "Dino Amadori", Meldola, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8082-336X
Sara BassoliDermatology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Dental & Morphological Sciences with Interest Transplant, Oncological & Regenerative Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 41125, Italy.
Marco SpadaforaAzienda Unità Sanitaria Locale - IRCCS di Reggio Emilia, Skin Cancer Center, Reggio Emilia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3509-4222
Victor Desmond MandelPorphyria and Rare Diseases Unit, San Gallicano Dermatological Institute-IRCCS, Roma, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0682-6148
Alice CasariDermatology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Dental & Morphological Sciences with Interest Transplant, Oncological & Regenerative Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 41125, Italy.
Johanna ChesterDermatology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Dental & Morphological Sciences with Interest Transplant, Oncological & Regenerative Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 41125, Italy.
Shaniko KaleciDermatology Unit, Department of Surgical, Medical, Dental & Morphological Sciences with Interest Transplant, Oncological & Regenerative Medicine, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, 41125, Italy.
Giorgio Lorenzo ColomboDepartment of Drug Sciences, CEFAT-Center of Pharmaceuticals Economics and Medical Technologies Evaluation, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Giovanni PellacaniDepartment of Clinical Internal, Anesthesiological and Cardiovascular Sciences, Dermatology Clinic, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In a recent prospective, multicenter, two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT), we demonstrated that adjunctive reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) in routine clinical practice provides clinical benefits, including safe melanoma detection and a 43.3% reduction in the number needed to excise (NNE). Methods: A cost-benefit analysis was conducted based on NNEs for standard care (5.3) and adjunctive RCM (3.0). Cost data were supplied by one center, applying a micro-costing approach from the hospital's perspective. Costs were calculated for dermatology exams, excisions, medications, histopathology, and follow-up. The outcomes were extrapolated to provincial and national settings to assess the economic benefits of RCM. Results: The cost per patient for standard care was €143.63, compared to €114.74 for adjunctive RCM. The cost per melanoma excised with standard care (NNE 5.3) was €904.87, almost twice the cost for RCM (€458.96). Annual regional and national costs for standard care were €864,150.85 and €11,491,849.00, respectively, while RCM reduced these to €438,306.80 and €5,828,792.00. Estimated annual savings with adjunctive RCM were €425,844.05 regionally and €5,663,057.00 nationally. The cost-benefit ratio for RCM was 3.89, meaning that for every €1 spent on RCM, there is a benefit of €3.89. Conclusion: In real-world clinical practice, adjunctive RCM offers significant economic advantages at local, regional, and national levels while maintaining patient safety and reducing unnecessary surgical procedures.

Indexed as

cost analysiscost–benefitdermoscopic examinationeconomicsmelanomareflectance confocal microscopyskin cancers

Identifiers

PMID39839194
PMCPMC11745940

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.