Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28785913›Full record

Trial reportClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2018

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy as induction and maintenance therapy for metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

H Zheng, L Xie, M Zhan, F Wen, T Xu, Q Li

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase III
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H ZhengDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
L XieDepartment of the Infrastructure, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
M ZhanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
F WenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
T XuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. fbqiu@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4239-4170
Q LiWest China Biostatistics and Cost-Benefit Analysis Center, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. keythera@126.com.
Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe BEYOND trial found that the addition of bevacizumab (B) to paclitaxel-carboplatin (PC) chemotherapy provided a significant clinical benefit to Chinese patients with metastatic non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of adding B to first-line PC induction and continuation maintenance therapy from a Chinese perspective.

methodsA Markov model was developed to estimate the cost and effectiveness of B + PC in the induction and maintenance therapy of patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC. Costs were calculated in the Chinese setting, and health outcomes derived from the BEYOND trial were measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the impact of various parameters in the study.

resultsThe B + PC treatment was more costly ($112,943.40 versus $32,171.43) and more effective (1.07 QALYs versus 0.80 QALYs) compared with the PC treatment. Adding B to the PC regimen for non-squamous NSCLC results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $299,155.44 per QALY, which exceeded the accepted societal willingness-to-pay threshold ($23,970.00) for China. In the sensitivity analysis, the duration of progression-free survival (PFS) for the B + PC group, the cost of the PFS state for B + PC group and the price of B were considered the most sensitive factors in the model.

conclusionsThe addition of B to first-line PC induction and maintenance therapy was not determined to be a cost-effective strategy for metastatic non-squamous NSCLC in China, even when an assistance program was provided.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabCarboplatinCarcinoma, Large CellCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansInduction ChemotherapyLung NeoplasmsMaintenance ChemotherapyPaclitaxelAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBevacizumabCarboplatinPaclitaxelCost-effectivenessInduction and maintenance therapyMetastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

Identifiers

PMID28785913
OpenAlexW2744137087

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.