MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048521093 · doi:10.1185/030079906x120968

Dosing patterns, treatment costs, and frequency of physician visits in adults with cancer receiving erythropoietic agents in managed care organizations

2006· article· en· W2048521093 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Lefèbvre, Antoine Gosselin, R. Scott McKenzie, Samir H. Mody, Catherine Tak Piech, Mei Sheng Duh

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEpoetin alfaDosingDarbepoetin alfaCumulative doseErythropoietinInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the dosing patterns and treatment costs of erythropoietic agents in adult (>or= 18 years of age) cancer patients newly initiated on epoetin alfa (EPO) or darbepoetin alfa (DARB) in managed care organizations. METHODS: An analysis of US medical claims (30 million lives in over 35 health plans) in the period July 1, 2002-February 28, 2005 was conducted. Patients with >or= 1 cancer claim within 90 days prior to initiating EPO or DARB, and who received at least two doses of the same erythropoietic agent, were included in this analysis. Weighted average weekly dosing, cumulative treatment dose, associated drug cost, dosing frequency patterns, and the frequency of outpatient visits were evaluated. The EPO:DARB dose ratio, based on average cumulative treatment doses, was assessed. RESULTS: 5639 EPO and 2166 DARB patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The EPO group was older (EPO 59.1 years; DARB 57.6 years; p < 0.001) with a higher proportion of men (EPO 38.1%; DARB 33.1%; p < 0.001). Variable dosing frequency was observed with similar treatment durations for the two groups (days: EPO 55.6; DARB 57.7; p = 0.122). A dose ratio of 236:1 was observed (average cumulative dose: EPO 252 856 U; DARB 1072 mcg). Average drug cost was significantly higher in the DARB group (drug cost: EPO 3077 dollars; DARB 4674 dollars; p < 0.001). The average number of hematology/oncology outpatient visits per patient (visits: EPO 7.4; DARB 7.3; p = 0.676) and outpatient visits for hemoglobin determination (visits: EPO 6.7; DARB 6.4; p = 0.093) during treatment was similar between the two groups. LIMITATIONS: The results were based on medical claims only. The absence of information on actual injection dates in pharmacy claims prevented their incorporation in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the average cumulative doses, the EPO:DARB dose ratio was 236:1 (Units EPO: mcg DARB) with 52% greater drug cost in the DARB group. Despite the variable administration frequency observed between the two agents, the number of hematology/oncology outpatient visits was not different.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.941

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.348 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207