Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41247381›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025

A modelled cost-utility analysis comparing early referral to specialist palliative care versus standard care for older people with acute myeloid leukaemia.

Elise Button, Nikki McCaffrey, Thomas W LeBlanc, Hannah Carter

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Elise ButtonCentre for Cancer and Palliative Care Outcomes, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. elise.button@flinders.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6792-7367
Nikki McCaffreyDeakin Health Economics, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3684-3723
Thomas W LeBlancDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0546-7895
Hannah CarterAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0046-4126

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo investigate whether early referral to specialist palliative care (SPC) is cost-effective compared to standard care for people ≥ 60 years of age with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia (AML).

methodsA modelled cost-utility analysis, from an Australian public healthcare system perspective, over a 5-year time horizon. A systematic review of studies reporting health state utility values (HSUVs), or convertible health-related quality of life measures, provided values for the decision tree model. Cost and effectiveness data were sourced from a broad review of the literature. All costs were estimated using 2022 Australian prices. Scenario analyses and sensitivity analyses explored the impact of varying key assumptions on the results. To account for uncertainty in the model, the mean of Monte Carlo simulation with 10,000 iterations, and 95% uncertainty intervals were reported for base case and scenario analyses results.

resultsFor the deterministic base case, SPC was associated with mean incremental cost-saving (AUD -$2805) and greater mean incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs [0.05]). In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of SPC being cost-effective or dominant was 57.3%. In scenario analyses, SPC dominated standard care in all eight scenarios. In one-way sensitivity analysis, results were sensitive to utility values in treatment-related health states.

conclusionsFindings indicate early SPC is likely to be cost-saving and more effective than standard care. Results must be interpreted cautiously given the reliance on assumptions and uncertainty of inputs in the model. However, findings are promising and warrant further research.

Indexed as

Leukemia, Myeloid, AcutePalliative CareReferral and ConsultationAgedAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisDecision TreesHumansMiddle AgedModels, EconomicMonte Carlo MethodQuality-Adjusted Life YearsQuality of LifeAcute myeloid leukaemiaEconomic evaluationOlder/geriatricPalliative careQuality of life

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.