ArticleClinical drug investigation2025
Cost-Effectiveness of Pre-emptive DPYD Genotyping Compared to Standard of Care Among Patients Receiving Fluoropyrimidine-Based Anti-cancer Treatment in Australia.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite international evidence demonstrating pre-emptive pharmacogenetics (PGx) screening is cost effective or cost saving in preventing serious or fatal toxicities, it is not routinely adopted in Australia. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of PGx screening versus standard of care (SOC) among patients with cancer undergoing fluoropyrimidine-based treatment (FP) in Australia.
methodsFrom the Australian healthcare perspective, we developed a cohort-based state transition model in TreeAge Pro 2024. The model used PACIFIC-PGx trial data for the PGx arm and literature-based inputs for the SOC arm. Patients transitioned between four health states (full-dose, reduced-dose, treatment termination or death) over two treatment cycles each corresponding to a standard 3-week period. Outcomes included the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, per adverse event averted, and per hospitalisation avoided. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (DSA, PSA) evaluated the effects of varying assumptions and the uncertainty associated with input parameters.
resultsPGx screening yielded incremental QALYs of 0.05 at an additional cost of $274.25 AUD (Australian dollars), resulting in an ICER of $6014.5 AUD per QALY gained compared to SOC. DSA showed the model's outcomes remained robust, with the ICER staying below the specified threshold of $50,000 AUD under a ± 20% variation in input parameters. PSA suggested PGx screening was favourable in 97.6% of iterations.
conclusionThis Australian single-arm study demonstrated that pre-emptive PGx screening prevents severe, fatal FP-related toxicities and hospitalisations and is likely to be cost effective. Our findings suggest the value of PGx screening and warrant implementation and reimbursement within Australian healthcare settings.
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.