Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30458884›Full record

ArticleJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2018

Cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line therapy in advanced renal-cell carcinoma.

Bin Wu, Qiang Zhang, Jie Sun

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

83 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Treatments for renal cell carcinoma: NICE Pilot Treatment Pathways Appraisal.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  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

23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Bin WuMedical Decision and Economic Group, Department of Pharmacy, South Campus, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Qiang ZhangDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Putuo Hospital, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jie SunDepartment of Urology, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China. scilwsjtu-sunjie@yahoo.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNivolumab plus ipilimumab improves overall survival and is associated with less toxicity compared with sunitinib in the first-line setting of advanced renal-cell carcinoma (RCC). The current study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab for first-line treatment of advanced RCC from the payer perspectives high- and middle-income regions.

methodsA decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the health and economic outcomes of first-line sunitinib and nivolumab plus ipilimumab treatment associated with advanced RCC. The clinical and utility data were obtained from published reports. The cost data were acquired for the payer perspectives of the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), and China. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the uncertainties of the results. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were used.

resultsNivolumab plus ipilimumab gained 0.70-0.76 QALYs compared with sunitinib. Our analysis determined the following ICERs for nivolumab plus ipilimumab over sunitinib in first-line advanced RCC treatment: US $ 85,506 /QALY; UK $ 126,499/QALY; and China $ 4682/QALY. Sensitivity analyses found the model outputs to be most affected for body weight and for the prices of nivolumab, sunitinib and ipilimumab.

conclusionsNivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment could gain more health benefits for advanced RCC in comparison with standard sunitinib, which is considered to be cost-effective in the US and China but not in the UK.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalCarcinoma, Renal CellHumansIpilimumabKidney NeoplasmsNivolumabAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalIpilimumabNivolumabCost-effectivenessIpilimumabNivolumabRenal cell carcinomaSunitinib

Identifiers

PMID30458884
PMCPMC6247499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.