Trial reportInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2020
Cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.
Trial report in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02367781 (A Phase III Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Phase III Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Atezolizumab (MPDL3280A, Anti-PD-L1 Antibody) in Combination With Carboplatin+Nab-Paclitaxel for Chemotherapy-Naive Patients With Stage IV Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Adverse Event Costs and Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Anticancer Drugs: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of immunotherapies for advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab plus standard chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for the first-line treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic gastric cancer, gastroesophageal junction cancer, and esophageal adenocarcinoma.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2022Trial
- First-line versus second-line use of selpercatinib in treatment of RET fusion-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of first-line treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- An updated cost-effectiveness analysis of osimertinib versus placebo in resected EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: the perspective of the United States.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Taletrectinib in ROS1+ non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of trastuzumab deruxtecan as a second-line treatment for HER2-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Adagrasib in the treatment of KRASTranslational cancer research · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of NALIRIFOX versus Nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine in previously untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Financial Toxicity for Pembrolizumab and Atezolizumab for Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Article
- Entrectinib as first-lineTranslational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of first-line versus second-line use of brigatinib followed by lorlatinib in patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- CDCA8, a mitosis-related gene, as a prospective pan-cancer biomarker: implications for survival prognosis and oncogenic immunology.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of amivantamab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in NSCLC with EGFR Exon 20 insertions.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Osimertinib in the treatment of resected EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- First-line treatments for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy: a systematic review, network meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Article
- First-line versus second-line use of pralsetinib in treatment of rearranged during transfection (RET) fusion-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background Adding atezolizumab to carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel improved progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. However, estimating the economy of atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel is urgent on account of the high cost of atezolizumab. Objective This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus carboplatin/nab- paclitaxel for untreated advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer from the United States payer perspective. Setting This study was based on randomized clinical trial data from the IMpower130 (NCT02367781) published in Lancet Oncology (May 2019). Method A Markov model was constructed to estimate the health expenditure on atezolizumab in combination with carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treatment. Drug costs were collected from Red Book Wholesale Acquisition Cost, and health state utility values were obtained from the literature. Uncertainty was evaluated via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Main outcome measure The main outcomes were cost, life years, quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results Over a 10-year horizon, atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel treatment was associated with an expected 1.76 life years and 0.99 quality-adjusted life years compared to the 1.21 life years and 0.67 quality-adjusted life years for carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel alone. Compared to carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel, atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel produced an incremental cost of $105,617. The resultant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $333,199 per quality-adjusted life year, which exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of $180,000 per quality-adjusted life year. The price of atezolizumab and utility values were the parameters that greatly impacted the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel exhibited 98.6% probability of being a cost-effective treatment option compared to atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel at a willingness-to-pay of $180,000 per quality-adjusted life year. However, reducing atezolizumab acquisition cost by 43.4% could make atezolizumab/carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel more cost-effective than carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel. Conclusion Adding atezolizumab to carboplatin/nab-paclitaxel was not cost-effective for advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer in the base-case scenario. Decreasing atezolizumab acquisition cost might enhance the cost-effectiveness.
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.