Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2006;24(7):651-9.
doi: 10.2165/00019053-200624070-00004.

Cost of lung cancer: a methodological review

Affiliations
Review

Cost of lung cancer: a methodological review

Laurent Molinier et al. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006.

Abstract

Cost of illness (COI) studies estimate the overall economic burden of a specific disease, rather than simply treatment-related costs. While having been criticised for not allowing resource prioritisation, COI studies can provide useful guidance, so long as they adhere to accepted methodology. The aim of this review is to analyse the methods used to evaluate the cost of lung cancer. Because of the increasing incidence and high direct and indirect costs of lung cancer, it is an important disease in terms of economic implications, and therefore provides a relevant example with which to review COI study methodologies. First, the key points of the methodology relating to COI studies were identified. COI studies relating to lung cancer were then reviewed, focussing on an analysis of the different methods used and an identification of the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. The COI studies that were analysed confirmed that lung cancer is a costly illness, and that hospitalisation and treatments account for a large part of direct costs, while indirect costs represent a large part of the total costs. The review also showed that COI studies adopted significantly different approaches to estimate the costs of lung cancer, reflecting a lack of consensus on the methodology of COI studies in this area. Hence, to increase the credibility of COI studies, closer agreement among researchers on methodological principles would be desirable.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(9):671-9 - PubMed
    1. Eur J Cancer. 1996 Dec;32A(13):2249-55 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997 Jan;11(1):75-88 - PubMed
    1. Pharmacoeconomics. 1998 Aug;14(2):143-8 - PubMed
    1. J Clin Oncol. 1998 Dec;16(12):3900-12 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources