Dose conversion and cost effectiveness of erythropoietic therapies in chemotherapy-related anemia: a Canadian application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the dose-conversion ratio (DCR) between epoetin alfa and darb-epoetin alfa in cancer patients and compare the treatment costs of both agents at the estimated DCRs. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature was carried out on clinical trials evaluating patients with chemotherapy-related anemia treated with epoetin alfa or darbepoetin alfa. A multivariate meta-analysis regression was conducted to determine the relative doses of these two agents at which they were equally effective. The effectiveness measure used was the area under the hemoglobin change curve. Using the estimated DCR for each dosing regimen, the relative cost of epoetin alfa and darbepoetin alfa treatments in Canada was evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-nine study arms, evaluating 12,923 patients (10,582 treated with epoetin alfa and 2341 treated with darbepoetin alfa), were eligible for this study. Results comparing specific dosing regimens indicated that the DCRs were systematically lower than 200:1. The cost premium associated with darbepoetin alfa weekly drug cost was between 37 and 44% above epoetin alfa for the same level of effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Based on the evidence from this meta-analysis, epoetin alfa appeared to be more cost-effective compared to darbepoetin alfa in Canada for cancer patients.
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) | 0.000 | 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".