2021
DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.12924
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Vitamin D supplementation to the older adult population in Germany has the cost‐saving potential of preventing almost 30 000 cancer deaths per year

Abstract: Recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated significant reduction in cancer mortality by vitamin D supplementation. We estimated costs and savings for preventing cancer deaths by vitamin D supplementation of the population aged 50+ years in Germany. Our analysis is based on national data on cancer mortality in 2016. The number of preventable cancer deaths was estimated by multiplying cancer deaths above age 50 with the estimated proportionate reduction in cancer mortality deri… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
21
0
4

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
1
21
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Of note, expected savings are entirely attributable to reductions in cancer mortality and not in cancer incidence, which is not affected by vitamin D. End-stage treatment costs among patients dying from cancer are, however, more than four-fold higher than among deaths from other causes [42], implying large savings even in the absence of a reduction in cancer incidence. Regarding achievable cancer mortality reduction, fortification is thus expected to be even considerably more economic than daily supplementation with vitamin D [3], with expected effects being only slightly smaller despite estimated costs being dramatically lower. A further advantage of food fortification is that it would not require regular medication intake and would also reach subgroups of the population who may be at particularly high risk of vitamin D deficiency and less likely to take vitamin D supplements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Of note, expected savings are entirely attributable to reductions in cancer mortality and not in cancer incidence, which is not affected by vitamin D. End-stage treatment costs among patients dying from cancer are, however, more than four-fold higher than among deaths from other causes [42], implying large savings even in the absence of a reduction in cancer incidence. Regarding achievable cancer mortality reduction, fortification is thus expected to be even considerably more economic than daily supplementation with vitamin D [3], with expected effects being only slightly smaller despite estimated costs being dramatically lower. A further advantage of food fortification is that it would not require regular medication intake and would also reach subgroups of the population who may be at particularly high risk of vitamin D deficiency and less likely to take vitamin D supplements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Total saved cancer treatment costs were calculated by multiplying numbers of preventable cancer deaths with estimated average end-of-life cancer care costs. The latter have been estimated to be around 40,000€ per cancer death, as outlined in our previous study on vitamin D supplementation [3]. It should be noted that neither our previous study nor the current study aimed for a comprehensive, precise cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-savings analysis, which in our view, would not be justified given the uncertainties, variations across countries, and dynamics in several of the key factors involved (including end-of-life cancer care costs).…”
Section: Costs and Savingsmentioning
confidence: 90%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The methodology (3) uses Irish Life Table No. 17 (from Central Statistics Office (CSO)), together with invasive cancer deaths in 2015 from the National Cancer Registry of Ireland (NCRI), and the number of bone fractures in Ireland (2014) and associated hospitalisation costs (4) . Three age groups were investigated: (1) ≥50 years, (2) ≥60 years, (3) ≥70 years.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%