MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892948293 · doi:10.1200/jgo.18.88400

Lives and Economic Loss in Brazil Due to Lack of Radiotherapy Access in Cervical Cancer

2018· article· en· W2892948293 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas C. Mendez, Fábio Ynoe de Moraes, Marcus Simões Castilho, Alexander V. Louie, Min Qu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCervical cancerLife expectancyRadiation therapyCost effectivenessMedical costsIndirect costsDemographyPsychological interventionCancerHealth careEnvironmental healthSurgeryInternal medicinePopulationNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Cervical cancer collects the highest survival benefit from radiotherapy (RT) among all malignancies. A large gap between oncological demand and RT availability exists for cervical cancer in Brazilian Public Health System (BPHS). Aim: To evaluate cost-effectiveness of universal access to RT and chemo-radiation (CRT) for untreated cervical cancer patients in the BPHS. Methods: The incremental cost was calculated based on the direct medical cost from a payer's perspective and the proportion of new cases with unmet RT/CRT needs in 2016. The incremental effectiveness was evaluated by life-year (LY) gain based on life expectancy, cervical cancer incidence and the number of cancer deaths due to lack of RT/CRT access as previously described. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated from direct medical costs and LYs. The indirect costs from mortality-related productivity loss (MRPL) were estimated based on life expectancy, wage and labor force participation rate. The MRPL was compared with direct medical cost. All costs and effectiveness were age-adjusted based on 2016 Brazilian data and discounted at 3% per year. Costs were adjusted to 2016 U.S. dollars. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to assess the robustness of the model. Results: The annual cost to close RT gap was $14.3 million, with additional cost of $4.1 million to close the CRT gap. The average years of potential life lost per death was 20.5. Cost per life saved was $10,820 for RT alone (ICER: $528/LY) and $18,919 for CRT (ICER: $584/LY), respectively. The MRPL due to shortage of RT/CRT were 70/81 million respectively. Conclusion: Providing universal access to RT/CRT for cervical cancer patients in the BPHS will incur low cost per life-year saved and provide large economical gain by saving thousands of lives.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.441 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global OncologySame topicAdvances in Oncology and RadiotherapyFrench-language works237,207