Cost-Effectiveness of Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measure Interventions in Cancer: Systematic Review and Parameter Extraction for Economic Modeling.

J Med Internet ResSep 11, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchOncology (Medical)

Marek Atter, Alistair Bullen, Kathrin Cresswell et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This systematic review evaluated the cost-effectiveness of electronic patient-reported outcome measures (ePROM) in cancer care, analyzing 34 publications from 27 studies. While some ePROM interventions showed cost-effectiveness due to improved quality of life and reduced hospitalizations, the overall evidence remains limited. Notably, 2 studies provided strong evidence of cost-effectiveness, highlighting the potential benefits of ePROM monitoring.

Key findings

  • 23 out of 26 ePROM interventions included automated decision support based on remote monitoring.
  • 2 studies demonstrated strong cost-effectiveness due to quality-of-life improvements and reduced hospitalizations.
  • 4 publications reported lower health resource use and costs associated with ePROMs, primarily from hospitalization reductions.
  • Only 2 of 12 qualitative studies addressed economic themes related to ePROM implementation.

Why it matters

Understanding the cost-effectiveness of ePROM interventions can inform clinical practice and resource allocation in oncology, potentially leading to improved patient outcomes and reduced healthcare costs.

Source

PubMed · PMID 42727066

Published in J Med Internet Res. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Oncology (Medical)

Clinical ResearchHematology

Ponatinib-Blinatumomab or Imatinib-Chemotherapy for Adult Ph-Positive ALL.

This multicenter, phase 3 randomized trial compared frontline ponatinib plus blinatumomab with imatinib plus chemotherapy in adults with Philadelphia-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

N Engl J MedOct 15, 2026Read summary
Clinical ResearchHematology

Efficacy and safety of mitapivat in patients with sickle cell disease (RISE UP): a phase 3, double-blind, global, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

RISE UP was a phase 3, double-blind, global, randomised, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 69 sites in 15 countries. It evaluated twice-daily mitapivat in patients older than 16 years with sickle cell disease…

LancetOct 24, 2026Read summary
Clinical ResearchRheumatology

Ianalumab for the Treatment of Patients with Sjögren's Disease.

Two 52-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trials evaluated monthly or less frequent ianalumab in patients with active Sjögren's disease.

N Engl J MedOct 22, 2026Read summary

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text
Create my personalized digestSee plans

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.