MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cost-utility of adjuvant trastuzumab in Her-2/neu positive breast cancer: A Canadian perspective

2007· article· en· W2970626564 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chris Skedgel, Daniel Rayson, T. Younis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTrastuzumabCardiotoxicityBreast cancerHazard ratioInternal medicineOncologyCohortQuality-adjusted life yearWillingness to payCost effectivenessCancerGynecologyDemographyChemotherapyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6574 Background: Recent RCTs have demonstrated a significant disease-free and overall survival advantage with adjuvant trastuzumab (aTZ) compared to chemotherapy alone in women with Her2/neu positive breast cancer. However, as aTZ is also associated with considerable costs and an increased risk of cardiotoxicity, an economic evaluation was undertaken to estimate the cost-utility (CU) of aTZ in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained relative to chemotherapy alone. Methods: A Markov model was developed to calculate the incremental costs and outcomes of 12 months of aTZ following chemotherapy in a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 women with Her2/neu positive breast cancer over a lifetime horizon. The model consisted of four broad health states: 1) disease-free, 2) local recurrence, 3) distant recurrence and 4) death. Each survival state was stratified as experienced with or without cardiotoxicity. The baseline rate of recurrence, the hazard ratio (HR) of recurrence with aTZ and the rate of adverse cardiac events were taken from recent RCTs. Age-sex specific background mortality, based on Statistics Canada life tables, was also incorporated. The cost of aTZ was based on our previous cost study (Drucker et al, ASCO 2006). Costs of local and distant cancer recurrence were derived from the literature, with an adjustment for the cost of palliative TZ (Potvin et al, ASCO 2005). Utility weights were taken from the literature. The model took a direct payer perspective, with costs reported in 2006 Canadian dollars (CDN$). Costs and QALYs were both discounted by 3% annually. The primary analysis assumed 5 years of benefit with aTZ therapy and an HR=1.0 over the remainder of the horizon. Results: Per 1,000 treated patients, aTZ was associated with a lifetime gain of 1,267 QALYs and an incremental cost of CDN$38.8 million. Lifetime CU was CDN$30,630 per QALY gained. aTZ met a CDN$50,000/QALY threshold at year 17. CU results were particularly sensitive to changes in the analysis horizon and assumptions regarding the long-term HR of aTZ. Conclusions: The lifetime CU of aTZ appears reasonable. However, further clinical follow-up is required to clarify the long-term outcomes of aTZ and confirm these CU estimates. 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.934

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.388 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→