The economic burden of colorectal cancer across Europe: a population-based cost-of-illness study

Cancer Survivors’ Long-Term Health Service Costs in Queensland, Australia: Results of a Population-Level Data Linkage Study (Cos-Q)

“…Research from other jurisdictions has focused on long-term costs for a specific type of cancer [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ], or on a population-level up to seven years from diagnosis [ 24 ]. Others used a population or cost-of-illness approach to estimate the economic burden for individual types of cancer during a certain year, rather than long-term [ 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ], or applied a model-based approach synthesizing published literature [ 29 ]. To date, there has been no population level research on the health service costs of cancer survivors beyond the initial years after treatment, including all age groups, based on detailed patient-level health service expenditure (reflecting gold standard bottom-up micro costing methodology [ 30 ]).…”

Vitamin D3 for reducing mortality from cancer and other outcomes before, during and beyond the COVID‐19 pandemic: A plea for harvesting low‐hanging fruit

“…This is highly relevant as cancer care costs are rising rapidly for many cancers, even those with limited progress in cancer treatment and survival. For example, overall expenditure on pharmaceuticals for colorectal cancer patients in the European Union increased by more than 200% from 2009 to 2015 [ 11 ], even though therapeutic breakthroughs have remained relatively limited for this cancer. Notwithstanding the need for further high‐quality studies on the effectiveness of vitamin D 3 supplementation or fortification in reducing mortality from specific cancer types, and despite substantial heterogeneity in cancer treatments and corresponding treatment costs across cancers and across countries, the overall picture of vitamin D 3 reducing cancer mortality as a whole, at very low costs, is fairly clear.…”

Populationsbasierte Studie – Ökonomische Belastung durch kolorektale Karzinome in Europa

“…Alle Länder Zentral- und Osteuropas befanden sich in der unteren Hälfte der Überlebensstatistik (EUR-33). Demgegenüber fielen die nordeuropäischen Länder in der oberen Hälfte auf, wobei gleichzeitig 50% der Länder mehr Geld für SACT ausgaben als die Skandinavier 1 .…”