MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168781879 · doi:10.3747/co.21.1327

Cost-effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX for first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer

2013· article· en· W2168781879 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
C Attard, Julia Brown, Karine Alloul, Malcolm J. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsSanofi (Canada)
FundersSanofi
KeywordsFOLFIRINOXGemcitabineIrinotecanMedicineOxaliplatinPancreatic cancerOncologyInternal medicineAdverse effectCancerColorectal cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The accord 11/0402 trial demonstrated that folfirinox (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, oxaliplatin) is significantly more efficacious than gemcitabine monotherapy in the first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (mpc). The present study assessed the cost-effectiveness of first-line folfirinox compared with first-line gemcitabine for public payers in Canada. METHODS: A Markov model simulated the movement of mpc patients from first-line treatment until death. Overall survival (os) and progression-free survival (pfs) data were derived from accord. Published utility data and Canadian costs were applied based on time in each health state and on treatment-related adverse event (ae) rates. Costs included first- and second-line therapy, monitoring, and costs to treat aes. Two separate analyses were performed. Analysis 1 was based on trial data [first-line folfirinox followed by second-line gemcitabine compared with first-line gemcitabine followed by second-line platinum-based chemotherapy, with use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (g-csf) allowed], and analysis 2 used Ontario treatment patterns before folfirinox funding (first-line folfirinox followed by second-line gemcitabine compared with first-line gemcitabine followed by best supportive care, no use of g-csf). RESULTS: Compared with first-line gemcitabine, first-line folfirinox resulted in more life-years and quality adjusted life-years (qalys). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis results showed that, for analyses 1 and 2 respectively, folfirinox has a greater than 85% probability and an approximately 80% probability of being cost-effective at the $100,000 threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with gemcitabine, first-line folfirinox significantly prolongs median os. Given the favourable cost per qaly, the improvement in clinical efficacy, and the limited available treatment options, folfirinox represents an attractive cost-effective treatment for mpc.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.340
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations47
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207