MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410755014 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2025.1575813

Clinical, humanistic and economic burden associated with recurrence among patients with early-stage cancers: a systematic literature review

2025· review· en· W4410755014 on OpenAlexaff
Raquel Aguiar‐Ibáñez, Yves Paul Vincent Mbous, E. Chawla, Deepshikha Pawar

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Canadian institutionsMerck Canada Inc. (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)MedicineSystematic reviewOncologyHumanismInternal medicineMEDLINEIntensive care medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: While cancer recurrences have been reported as negatively affecting patients' prognosis and imposing an economic burden to healthcare systems, there is no comprehensive summary of evidence on how frequently recurrence occurs across early-stage cancers. The goal of this study was to assess recurrence rates and their resulting clinical, humanistic and economic burden in patients with early-stage cancers. Methods: A narrative, systematic literature review was conducted including non-interventional studies evaluating adult patients diagnosed with cancer at early-stages (including: melanoma, triple negative breast cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, renal-cell carcinoma, gastric cancer, head and neck cancer, and bladder cancer). Selected studies were identified through electronic database searches, conference proceedings, and grey literature sources. Outcomes of interest included recurrence rates, post-recurrence survival, and the humanistic and economic burden associated with recurrences. Results: Among 82 studies included, 75 reported recurrence rates, eight investigated post-recurrence survival, five evaluated post-recurrence patient-reported outcomes, and seven examined the post-recurrence economic burden. Across most cancer types, recurrences occurred frequently, with later stages at diagnosis being associated with higher recurrence rates and shorter time to recurrence compared to earlier stages at diagnosis. Cancer recurrence was associated with lower survival, reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL), worsening cancer-related symptoms and higher healthcare resource utilization. These outcomes were also more pronounced among patients diagnosed at later stages. Among cancer survivors, most patients experienced moderate fear of cancer recurrence (FCR). Patients with clinically relevant FCR had worse cancer-related symptoms and reduced HRQoL compared to those without. Direct costs in recurrent patients (predominantly in the form of inpatient and outpatient costs) were the main drivers for the total healthcare costs incurred, irrespective of the cancer types and stages. Conclusion: This study highlights the high recurrence rates experienced by patients diagnosed with early-stage cancer, particularly if diagnosed at later stages (Stage III), and their clinical, humanistic and economic impact. Cancer stage at the time of diagnosis is a key indicator of recurrence risk and post-recurrence outcomes, emphasizing the importance of earlier diagnosis and the need for therapies that prevent recurrences to better mitigate their clinical, humanistic and economic burden.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.282 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicEconomic and Financial Impacts of CancerFrench-language works237,207