Cost‐effectiveness of positron emission tomography‐CT in the evaluation of cancer of unknown primary of the head and neck
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET)-CT is a useful diagnostic adjunct for cancer unknown primary (CUP) of the head and neck; however, the increased cost has not been justified with an economic evaluation in this patient population. METHODS: A decision tree analysis was performed from the perspective of the third party payer. Primary outcome was cost per life year gained ($/LYG). The 2 comparative groups were: (1) PET-CT followed by panendoscopy versus (2) panendoscopy alone. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for N1, N2, and N3 CUP were $369.83/LYG, $329.43/LYG, and $4900.28/LYG, respectively. The sensitivity analysis demonstrated a 96.8%, 97.1%, and 60.1% certainty that PET-CT is cost-effective for CUP with N1, N2, and N3 disease, respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of PET-CT in patients with N1 and N2 CUP is the cost-effective choice. The cost-effectiveness in N3 CUP is questionable and should be used on an individual case basis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".