Next Article in Journal
Panitumumab Monotherapy Compared with Cetuximab and Irinotecan Combination Therapy in Patients with Previously Treated KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Previous Article in Journal
A Prospective Evaluation of an Interdisciplinary Nutrition–Rehabilitation Program for Patients with Advanced Cancer
Current Oncology is published by MDPI from Volume 28 Issue 1 (2021). Previous articles were published by another publisher in Open Access under a CC-BY (or CC-BY-NC-ND) licence, and they are hosted by MDPI on mdpi.com as a courtesy and upon agreement with Multimed Inc..
Open AccessArticle

Publication Patterns of Cancer Cost-Effectiveness Studies Presented at Major Conferences

by 1,2,3,*, 1, 1 and 1
1
Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
2
Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
3
Division of Biostatistics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Curr. Oncol. 2013, 20(6), 319-325; https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1438
Received: 10 September 2013 / Revised: 1 October 2013 / Accepted: 11 November 2013 / Published: 1 December 2013
Objective: To be useful to policymakers and stakeholders, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAS) should be published in a timely manner and without bias. The aims of the present study were to examine the time between conference abstract presentation and subsequent publication, to determine the factors associated with time to publication, to evaluate potential publication bias, and to examine discrepancies in the results between abstract and publication. Methods: Abstracts of CEAS presented at the annual meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the American Society of Hematology (ASH), and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) between 1997 and 2007 were reviewed. Time-to-event analysis was performed to assess the timeliness of publication and to examine factors associated with time to publication. Summary statistics were used to assess discrepancies in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERS) between abstract and publication. Results: Of 164 abstracts identified, 65 (39.6%) were subsequently published. The 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year publication rates were 12.8%, 25%, 34.2%, and 40.5% respectively. Abstracts were more likely to be published if presented at ASCO than at ISPOR (hazard ratio: 1.94; p = 0.038). There was no direct evidence of publication bias for abstracts with favourable ICERS. Comparing ICERS between abstracts and publications, the mean absolute difference was 23.8%; 50% of studies had a change in ICER exceeding 10%. Conclusions: Publication rates for CEAS were low, and publication was not timely with respect to informing the decision-making process for funding. Abstract results often differed from publication results and cannot reliably be used in the decision-making process for funding.
Keywords: cost-effectiveness analyses; time to publication; publication bias; abstracts cost-effectiveness analyses; time to publication; publication bias; abstracts
MDPI and ACS Style

Chan, K.K.; Siu, E.; Mozessohn, L.; Cheung, M.C. Publication Patterns of Cancer Cost-Effectiveness Studies Presented at Major Conferences. Curr. Oncol. 2013, 20, 319-325. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1438

AMA Style

Chan KK, Siu E, Mozessohn L, Cheung MC. Publication Patterns of Cancer Cost-Effectiveness Studies Presented at Major Conferences. Current Oncology. 2013; 20(6):319-325. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1438

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chan, K.K.; Siu, E.; Mozessohn, L.; Cheung, M.C. 2013. "Publication Patterns of Cancer Cost-Effectiveness Studies Presented at Major Conferences" Curr. Oncol. 20, no. 6: 319-325. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.20.1438

Find Other Styles

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Back to TopTop