MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Costs associated with intravenous (IV) chemotherapy administration in patients with lung cancer

2007· article· en· W2258401109 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur T. Skarin, Mei Sheng Duh, Jennifer Weiner, Patrick Lefèbvre, Maureen P. Neary

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsGlaxoSmithKline (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChemotherapyLung cancerRoute of administrationInternal medicineCancerAdministration (probate law)OncologyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

18092 Background: The IV method of chemotherapy administration imposes not only a time burden on patients and facilities, but also has cost implications for payers. This study aims to assess the costs associated with the IV administration of chemotherapies for patients with all forms of lung cancer and for a subset of patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in a large employer-payer claims database. Methods: Using medical claims data from 5.5 million beneficiaries between 01/01/1998 and 01/31/2006, we identified 8,605 patients with lung cancer (ICD-9 codes 162.3–162.9, 176.4, or 197.0) receiving IV chemotherapies. We then identified a subset of 942 patients likely to have SCLC by selecting those receiving chemotherapy regimens primarily used to treat SCLC and excluding patients receiving procedures and treatments often associated with NSCLC. Average total costs per day of IV chemotherapy administration (including drug, administration costs, etc.) were computed for all patients and for the SCLC subset based on the actual amount paid. Costs were also computed separately for: IV chemotherapy drugs, IV chemotherapy administration procedures, and other drugs and services such as IV administration of other drugs to treat side effects of chemotherapies, evaluation and management, and laboratory tests. Results: Average total cost per day of IV chemotherapy administration for all patients was $1,112, with $652 (59%) attributable to IV chemotherapy drugs, $85 (8%) to IV chemotherapy administration procedures, and $375 (34%) to other drugs and services. Among patients with SCLC, average total daily cost was $815, with $423 (52%) attributable to IV chemotherapy drugs, $89 (11%) to IV chemotherapy administration, and $303 (37%) to other drugs and services. Conclusions: IV chemotherapy administration procedures and other visit-related services accounted for 42% and 48% of total costs in patients with all forms of lung cancer and those with SCLC, respectively. The increased availability and use of oral chemotherapy drugs in lung cancer should provide savings to payers by avoiding the costs associated with IV administration. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.427 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207