MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 3506: Cost Effectiveness of Adding PCI to Optimal Medical Therapy in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Economic Outcomes from the COURAGE Trial

2007· article· en· W4233458874 on OpenAlexaff
William S. Weintraub, Ron Goeree, Zefeng Zhang, Koon Teo, Paul Kolm, John A. Spertus, David J. Maron, Robert A. O’Rourke, Pamela Hartigan, Steven D. Culler, Edmund R. Becker, William E. Boden, Paul G. Barnett

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConventional PCIPercutaneous coronary interventionQuality-adjusted life yearCost effectivenessCoronary artery diseaseIncremental cost-effectiveness ratioRandomized controlled trialClinical endpointEmergency medicineInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The main results of COURAGE showed no differences in all-cause mortality or non-fatal MI (primary endpoint), the composite of death, MI or stroke, or hospitalization for ACS (secondary endpoints) during 4.6 year median follow-up in the 2,287 patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) randomized to optimal medical therapy (OMT) with or without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There was a benefit to PCI in quality of life measured with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire. This study focuses on cost-effectiveness of PCI. Methods: Resource utilization including initial and follow-up hospitalizations were assigned a DRG and then costs assigned from Medicare reimbursement. Medication costs were assessed from Redbook average wholesale price. Survival was estimated for patients from Framingham data. Survival was quality adjusted from utility measured by standard gamble. Cost and outcome were discounted 3%. Costs after the trial period are Medicare average costs. Cost-effectiveness is expressed as an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER), of cost per life year (LY) or quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. The distribution of the ICER was assessed by bootstrap. Results: The added cost of PCI is approximately $10,000, without significant gain in LY or QALYs. The ICER varied from just over $150,000 to just under $300,000 per LY or QALY gained with PCI. A large minority of the distributions of the ICERs found PCI to be dominated by OMT, that is OMT offering better outcome at lower cost. Conclusions: The addition of PCI to OMT as an initial management strategy costs significantly more without offering an advantage in survival or QALYs. The ICER is high compared to conventional benchmarks, and the distribution includes infinity and low probability of being below $50,000/QALY gained. PCI in addition to OMT is not a cost-effective initial management strategy for symptomatic, chronic coronary artery disease.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→