MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2570534554 · doi:10.2147/ceor.s126379

Dalteparin versus vitamin K antagonists for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer and renal impairment: a Canadian pharmacoeconomic analysis

2017· article· en· W2570534554 on OpenAlexaffabout
George Dranitsaris, Lesley G Shane, Mark Crowther, Guillaume Feugère

Bibliographic record

VenueClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)McMaster UniversityAugmentium Pharma Consulting (Canada)
FundersPfizer
KeywordsMedicineLow molecular weight heparinConfidence intervalPopulationRelative riskRandomized controlled trialVenous thromboembolismInternal medicineHeparinPediatricsIntensive care medicineThrombosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patients with cancer are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and the risk is further elevated after a primary VTE. To reduce the risk of recurrent events, extended prophylaxis with vitamin K antagonists (VKA) is available for use. However, in a large randomized trial (Comparison of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin versus Oral Anticoagulant Therapy for the Prevention of Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Cancer [CLOT]; Lee et al), extended duration dalteparin reduced the relative risk of recurrent VTE by 52% compared to VKA ( p =0.002). A recent subgroup analysis of patients with moderate-to-severe renal impairment also revealed lower absolute VTE rates with dalteparin (3% vs. 17%; p =0.011). To measure the economic value of dalteparin as an alternative to VKA, a patient-level cost utility analysis was conducted from a Canadian perspective. Methods: Resource use data captured during the CLOT trial were extracted and linked to 2015 Canadian unit cost estimates. Health state utilities were then measured using the Time-Trade-Off technique in 24 randomly selected members of the general Canadian public to estimate the gains in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Results: For the entire CLOT trial population (n=676), the dalteparin group had significantly higher mean costs compared to the VKA group ($Can5,771 vs. $Can2,569; p <0.001). However, the utility assessment revealed that 21 of 24 respondents (88%) selected dalteparin over VKA, with an associated gain of 0.14 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10–0.18) QALYs. When the incremental cost of dalteparin was combined with the QALY gain, dalteparin had a cost of $Can23,100 (95% CI: $Can19,200–$Can25,800) per QALY gained. The analysis in patients with renal impairment suggested even better economic value with the cost per QALY gained being <$14,000. Conclusion: Extended duration dalteparin is a cost-effective alternative to VKA for the prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with cancer, especially in those with renal impairment. Keywords: venous thromboembolism, cancer, recurrence, low-molecular-weight heparin, dalteparin, vitamin K antagonists

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.235

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.009
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinicoEconomics and Outcomes ResearchSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207