ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2016
Cost-effectiveness of pazopanib compared with sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Canada.
Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-utility of Sunitinib Versus Pazopanib in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in Canada using Real-world Evidence.Clinical drug investigation · 2018Trial
- Battle against time for innovative cancer treatment: an updated cost-effectiveness analysis of pemigatinib in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of finotonlimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Tremelimumab Plus Durvalumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the USA.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- A cost-effectiveness comparison between immunotherapy combination regimens and sunitinib for advanced renal cell carcinoma in the USA and China.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2025Article
- Scoping Review of Economic Analyses of Rare Kidney Diseases.Kidney international reports · 2024Article
- Cost-Effectiveness and Budget Impact Analyses of Selective Internal Radiation Therapy versus Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab from a German Statutory Health Insurance Perspective.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of tumor-treating fields plus standard therapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer progressed after platinum-based therapy in the United States.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of the First Line Treatment Options For Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in India.JCO global oncology · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness of sintilimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Article
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Plus an Anti-VEGF Antibody as the First-Line Treatment for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Network Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Nivolumab Versus Sorafenib as First-Line Therapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- First-line sintilimab plus chemotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A cost-effectiveness analysis from China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab vs Sorafenib as First-Line Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Pembrolizumab plus Axitinib Versus Sunitinib as First-Line Therapy in Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma in the U.S.The oncologist · 2021Article
- First-line treatments for advanced renal-cell carcinoma with immune checkpoint inhibitors: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2020Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Test-Directed Olaparib for Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
- Economic Burden of Renal Cell Carcinoma-Part I: An Updated Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Canada and elsewhere, pazopanib and sunitinib-tyrosine kinase inhibitors targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor receptors-are recommended as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mrcc). A large randomized noninferiority trial of pazopanib versus sunitinib (comparz) demonstrated that the two drugs have similar efficacy; however, patients randomized to pazopanib experienced better health-related quality of life (hrqol) and nominally lower rates of non-study medical resource utilization.
methodsThe cost-effectiveness of pazopanib compared with sunitinib for first-line treatment of mrcc from a Canadian health care system perspective was evaluated using a partitioned-survival model that incorporated data from comparz and other secondary sources. The time horizon of 5 years was based on the maximum duration of follow-up in the final analysis of overall survival from the comparz trial. Analyses were conducted first using list prices for pazopanib and sunitinib and then by assuming that the prices of sunitinib and pazopanib would be equivalent.
resultsBased on list prices, expected costs were CA$10,293 less with pazopanib than with sunitinib. Pazopanib was estimated to yield 0.059 more quality-adjusted life-years (qalys). Pazopanib was therefore dominant (more qalys and lower costs) compared with sunitinib in the base case. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, pazopanib was dominant in 79% of simulations and was cost-effective in 90%-100% of simulations at a threshold cost-effectiveness ratio of CA$100,000. Assuming equivalent pricing, pazopanib yielded CA$917 in savings in the base case, was dominant in 36% of probabilistic sensitivity analysis simulations, and was cost-effective in 89% of simulations at a threshold cost-effectiveness ratio of CA$100,000.
conclusionsCompared with sunitinib, pazopanib is likely to be a cost-effective option for first-line treatment of mrcc from a Canadian health care perspective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.