ArticleJCO oncology practice2025
What Is the Cost Impact of Second Opinions in Oncology? A Retrospective Review.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Feasibility Study: Early Experiences With a Cancer Center's Virtual Expert Medical Opinion Program.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeSecond opinions in oncology may optimize treatment plans, resulting in improved outcomes such as prognosis and morbidity. Changes in treatment plans are often de-escalations in treatment intensity. However, data on the cost impact of changes in cancer treatment resulting from second opinions are limited.
methodsWe used a cohort of 120 patients who presented to a high-volume cancer center for a second opinion and also had a documented first opinion-30 patients each from four disease types: colorectal, head and neck, lung, and myeloma. For the 43 total patients who had a change in treatment from the second opinion compared with the first opinion, we estimated costs of treatment for the first and second opinions across the modalities of surgery, radiation, and drug treatment.
resultsAmong the 43 patients with a change between the first and second opinions, seven patients had a higher cost from the second opinion, 31 had a lower cost, and five had the same cost. Averaged across all 120 cases-43 with changes in treatment and the rest without-mean cost savings were $15,015 in US dollars (USD) per patient, ranging by disease type from $2,517 USD (lung) to $43,437 USD (myeloma). Decreases in cost were due to less-intensive surgery or drug therapy regimens, or shifts from treatment to no treatment (observation).
conclusionFurther investigation is needed across cancer types and in other settings to confirm the finding of de-escalations and resulting cost savings from second opinions.
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.