PloS one · 2018
An early analysis of the cost-effectiveness of a diagnostic classifier for risk stratification of haematuria patients (DCRSHP) compared to flexible cystoscopy in the diagnosis of bladder cancer.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sutton Andrew J, Lamont John V, Evans R Mark, Williamson Kate, O'Rourke Declan, Duggan Brian, Sagoo Gurdeep S, Reid Cherith N, Ruddock Mark W
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Urothelial bladder cancer (UBC) is the 5th most common cancer in Western societies. The most common symptom of UBC is haematuria. Cystoscopy the gold standard for UBC detection, allows direct observation of the bladder, but is expensive, invasive, and uncomfortable. This study examines whether an alternative new urine-based diagnostic test, the DCRSHP, is cost-effective as a triage diagnostic tool compared to flexible cystoscopy in the diagnosis of UBC in haematuria patients.
METHODS: A model-based cost-utility analysis using cost per quality adjusted life year and life year gained, parameterised with secondary data sources.
RESULTS: If the DCRSHP is targeted at haematuria patients at lower risk of having bladder cancer e.g. younger patients, non-smokers, then it can be priced as high as £620, and be both effective and cost-effective. Sensitivity analysis found that DCRSHP is approximately 80% likely to be cost-effective across all willingness to pay values (for a QALY) and prevalence estimates.
CONCLUSION: This analysis shows the potential for a non-invasive test to be added to the diagnostic pathway for haematuria patients suspected of having UBC. If the DCRSHP is applied targeting haematuria patients at low risk of UBC, then it has the potential to be both effective and cost-effective.
METHODS: A model-based cost-utility analysis using cost per quality adjusted life year and life year gained, parameterised with secondary data sources.
RESULTS: If the DCRSHP is targeted at haematuria patients at lower risk of having bladder cancer e.g. younger patients, non-smokers, then it can be priced as high as £620, and be both effective and cost-effective. Sensitivity analysis found that DCRSHP is approximately 80% likely to be cost-effective across all willingness to pay values (for a QALY) and prevalence estimates.
CONCLUSION: This analysis shows the potential for a non-invasive test to be added to the diagnostic pathway for haematuria patients suspected of having UBC. If the DCRSHP is applied targeting haematuria patients at low risk of UBC, then it has the potential to be both effective and cost-effective.