Cost effectiveness of endosonography versus surgical staging in potentially resectable lung cancer: A health economics analysis of the ASTER trial from a European perspective

40Citations
Citations of this article
66Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In the ASTER study, mediastinal staging was more accurate for patients randomised to combined endobronchial and endoscopic ultrasound, followed by surgical staging if endoscopy was negative, versus surgical staging alone. Here, we report survival, quality of life and cost effectiveness up to 6 months, for the UK, The Netherlands and Belgium, separately. Survival in the two arms of the study was similar. In all three countries, the endosonography strategy had slightly higher quality-adjusted life years over 6 months, and was cheaper. Therefore, based on clinical accuracy and cost effectiveness, we conclude that mediastinal staging should commence with endosonography.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rintoul, R. C., Glover, M. J., Jackson, C., Hughes, V., Tournoy, K. G., Dooms, C., … Sharples, L. D. (2014). Cost effectiveness of endosonography versus surgical staging in potentially resectable lung cancer: A health economics analysis of the ASTER trial from a European perspective. Thorax, 69(7), 679–681. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2013-204374

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free