| Title |
Is the 21-gene recurrence score a cost-effective assay in endocrine-sensitive node-negative breast cancer?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1586/erp.13.4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nathan WD Lamond, Chris Skedgel, Tallal Younis |
| Abstract |
The 21-gene recurrence score (RS) is a gene expression profile assay currently endorsed for use in patients with endocrine-sensitive node-negative breast cancers. The RS has been shown to augment current 'prognostic' and 'predictive' assessments of relapse risk and chemotherapy benefits, respectively, and lead to significant change in oncologists' recommendations for adjuvant chemotherapy, with an overall reduction in chemotherapy utilization. The RS (Oncotype DX) is marketed by Genomic Health Inc. (CA, USA) and currently retails for approximately US$4290 per patient. Like all novel tests/therapies, however, these upfront costs should be examined in the context of all its clinical benefits through cost-effectiveness or cost-utility evaluations. This review highlights the clinical evidence supporting RS testing for patients with endocrine-sensitive node-negative breast cancers, and examines all published economic evaluations that examined its 'value for money' in this setting. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 6 | 21% |
| Unknown | 3 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 41% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 April 2021.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
#262
of 765 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,306
of 318,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
#64
of 213 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 765 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 318,831 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 213 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.