Literature DB >> 8120916

Adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer: economics returns to research and cost-effectiveness of treatment.

M L Brown1, S G Nayfield, L M Shibley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 1989, the National Cancer Institute issued a clinical announcement advising physicians of the benefits of combined levamisole and fluorouracil as an adjuvant treatment for patients with stage III colon cancer.
PURPOSE: We have estimated the cost-effectiveness of the combined treatment and estimated the social return on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) research investment that led to this innovative cancer treatment.
METHODS: A computer simulation model, CAN*TROL, was used to estimate costs and benefits for a population cross-section receiving the adjuvant treatment. A method similar to "Q-TWiST" was used to assess the impact of quality-of-life adjustments.
RESULTS: For a typical base-line case, the calculated cost-effectiveness is a very favorable $2094 per year of life saved. Using a variety of less favorable assumptions, cost-effectiveness is still less than $5000 per year of life saved, again a favorable value. Quality-of-life adjustments have a negligible effect on the cost-effectiveness outcome. The net present value of the return to the NIH research investment is estimated to be $1.66 billion.
CONCLUSIONS: Under a wide range of reasonable assumptions, adjuvant therapy for stage III colon cancer appears to be a very cost-effective procedure. The investment in the research that resulted in this therapy promises to yield a high return.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8120916     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/86.6.424

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  13 in total

Review 1.  Benefit valuation in economic evaluation of cancer therapies. A systematic review of the published literature.

Authors:  J Brown; M Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Management of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  A Melville; T A Sheldon; R Gray; A Sowden
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1998-06

3.  Fair and effective resource allocation in cancer care: uncharted territory?

Authors:  J A Green; C Williams; A Cribb; B Brecher; M Evans
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  1996-02

4.  Health Technology Assessment as a Priority-Setting Tool for Universal Health Coverage: The Call for Global Action at the Prince Mahidol Award Conference 2016.

Authors:  Yot Teerawattananon; Alia Luz
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Micrometastases: are they clinically significant disease?

Authors:  H J Andreyev; D Cunningham
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 23.059

6.  Scleroderma and silicone breast implants.

Authors:  D Whorton; O Wong
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1997-09

7.  Preference values associated with stage III colon cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Jennie H Best; Louis P Garrison; William Hollingworth; Scott D Ramsey; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Cost effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing for uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 before irinotecan administration for metastatic colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Heather Taffet Gold; Michael J Hall; Victoria Blinder; Bruce R Schackman
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  Systematic review of methods for evaluating healthcare research economic impact.

Authors:  Bahareh Yazdizadeh; Reza Majdzadeh; Hojat Salmasian
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2010-03-02

Review 10.  Management of colorectal cancer in elderly patients: focus on the cost of chemotherapy.

Authors:  Matthew J Matasar; Vijaya Sundararajan; Victor R Grann; Alfred I Neugut
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.