↓ Skip to main content

Cost-efficacy of acceleration partial-breast irradiation compared with whole-breast irradiation

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cost-efficacy of acceleration partial-breast irradiation compared with whole-breast irradiation
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10549-013-2412-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chirag Shah, Thomas B. Lanni, Harkiran Saini, Anish Nanavati, J. Ben Wilkinson, Shahed Badiyan, Frank Vicini

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze the cost-efficacy of multiple accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI) techniques compared with whole breast irradiation (WBI) delivered utilizing 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A previously reported matched-pair analysis consisting of 199 patients receiving WBI and 199 patients receiving interstitial APBI formed the basis of this analysis. Cost analyses included a cost minimization analysis, incremental cost- effectiveness ratio (ICER) analysis, and cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) analysis. Per 1,000 patients treated, the cost savings with the utilization of APBI compared to WBI IMRT is $14.9 million, $10.9 million, $8.8 million, $5.0 million, and $9.7 million for APBI 3D-CRT, APBI IMRT, APBI single-lumen (SL), APBI multi-lumen (ML), and APBI interstitial, respectively. Per 1,000 patients treated, the cost savings with the utilization of APBI compared to WBI 3D-CRT is $6.0 million, $2.0 million, and $0.7 million for APBI 3D-CRT, APBI IMRT, and APBI interstitial, respectively. The cost per QALY for APBI SL, APBI ML, and APBI interstitial compared with APBI 3D-CRT are $12,273, $66,032, and $546, respectively. When incorporating non-medical costs and cost of recurrences the cost per QALY was $54,698 and $49,009 for APBI ML compared with APBI 3D-CRT. When compared to WBI IMRT, all APBI techniques are cost-effective based on cost minimization, ICER, and QALY analyses. When compared to WBI 3D-CRT, external beam APBI techniques represent a more cost-effective approach based on cost minimization with brachytherapy representing a cost-effective approach based on cost per QALY.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 7 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Professor 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 43%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 9 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2020.
All research outputs
#6,409,166
of 22,771,140 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#1,404
of 4,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,479
of 285,096 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#19
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,771,140 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,652 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 285,096 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.