ArticleClinical drug investigation2020
New Oral Anticoagulants for Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy: An Economic Evaluation in a Chinese Setting.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of direct oral anticoagulants for cancer-associated thrombosis: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory cancer patients with a high Khorana score: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Blood advances · 2020Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of direct oral anticoagulants versus low-molecular-weight heparin and no thromboprophylaxis in primary prevention of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Direct oral anticoagulants versus low molecular weight heparins for the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Thrombosis journal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveRecent trials showed that thromboprophylaxis with new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) is effective and safe in patients with cancer initiating chemotherapy. However, the cost effectiveness of NOACs is unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of preventing venous thromboembolism with NOACs with no thromboprophylaxis for patients with cancer initiating systemic chemotherapy from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.
methodsA decision analytical model consisting of both acute and chronic venous thromboembolism complications was used to assess the cost effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis with NOACs vs no thromboprophylaxis. The key clinical data were derived from the CASSINI and AVERT trials. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for the two strategies. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed.
resultsCompared with no thromboprophylaxis, NOACs gained 0.072 QALY at an incremental cost of $US930, leading to an ICER of 12,919/QALY in patients with Khorana scores ≥ 2 by pooling the data from the CASSINI and AVERT trials. Among patients confirmed with no deep-vein thrombosis before thromboprophylaxis (the CASSINI trial) and patients without deep-vein thrombosis screening before thromboprophylaxis (the AVERT trial), the ICERs were $70,897/QALY and $87,204/QALY, respectively. The probability of NOACs being cost effective was 42% at a willingness to pay of $10,276/QALY. The ICER was sensitive to the relative risks of death and asymptomatic venous thromboembolism between NOACs and no thromboprophylaxis and the cost of NOACs.
conclusionsThromboprophylaxis with NOACs is not likely to be cost effective in patients initiating chemotherapy in the Chinese context. The decision about thromboprophylaxis should be tailored based on the survival of patients with cancer, the risks of venous thromboembolism, and major bleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.