ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2026
A Cost Analysis of Adverse Event Management of Systemic Therapies for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer on Patients with at Least Two Previous Lines of Treatment in Spain.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: First, to estimate the cost associated with the management of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) experienced by patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had received late-line therapies (3L+) in Spain. Second, based on the tolerability profiles, the total AEs cost per therapy was estimated. Methods: A cost-analysis was developed to estimate the economic impact associated with the patient management throughout the course of related-AEs of currently available 3L+ therapies for mCRC in Spain (regorafenib, fruquintinib, trifluridine/tipiracil (T/T) and T/T + bevacizumab). The National Health System (NHS) perspective was selected, thus only direct healthcare resources were considered (pharmaceutical treatments, specialist visits, hospital admissions and procedures). For each AE, a total management cost was calculated by multiplying resource consumption by its unitary cost. Finally, for each alternative, the total AEs cost was estimated multiplying the AEs incidence rate by its management cost. Unit costs (€, 2025) were obtained from national databases. AEs incidence rates were obtained from pivotal clinical trials. Anchored comparisons were calculated using a difference-in-differences (DID) approach with best-supportive care as a common reference. Results: Total cost associated with AEs grade ≥3 occurring in patients with mCRC receiving 3L+ ranged from €300.19/patient for the management of hypertension to €3335.11/patient for increased bilirubin. Adjusting AEs for reported incidences, the total cost was €284.54 for fruquintinib (FRESCO), €301.82 for fruquintinib (FRESCO-2), €749.91 for T/T + bevacizumab (SUNLIGHT), €750.56 for T/T (SUNLIGHT), €1383.57 for T/T (RECOURSE) and €1158.57 for regorafenib (CORRECT). Fruquintinib in the anchored comparison based on FRESCO and FRESCO-2 shows: a cost reduction of €398.70 and €360.98 compared to regorafenib (CORRECT), and a cost reduction of €491.55 and €453.83 compared to T/T (RECOURSE). Conclusion: The results of this analysis showed that fruquintinib was associated with lower management costs of AEs in patients with mCRC treated in late-line in Spain.
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.