ArticleClinical drug investigation2020
Cost-Effectiveness of Lenvatinib Compared with Sorafenib for the First-Line Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Australia.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Atezolizumab and Bevacizumab Targeted-Therapy in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review of Cost-effectiveness Analyses.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2024Pooled it
- Lenvatinib in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of economic evaluations.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Tremelimumab Plus Durvalumab for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the USA.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Lenvatinib and immune-checkpoint inhibitors in hepatocellular carcinoma: mechanistic insights, clinical efficacy, and future perspectives.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2024Review
- Economic evaluation of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and China.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of disease modelling for health economic evaluations of systemic therapies in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.PloS one · 2023Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of sintilimab plus bevacizumab biosimilar compared with lenvatinib as the first-line treatment of unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Donafenib as First-Line Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in China.Advances in therapy · 2022Article
- Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors plus molecular targeted agents after the progression of lenvatinib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- The Cost Effectiveness of Donafenib Compared With Sorafenib for the First-Line Treatment of Unresectable or Metastatic Hepatocellular Carcinoma in China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- A Comparison of Lenvatinib versus Sorafenib in the First-Line Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Selection Criteria to Guide Physician's Choice in a New Therapeutic Scenario.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2021Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveIn the REFLECT trial, lenvatinib showed superior clinical benefits to sorafenib in terms of progression-free survival and was non-inferior for overall survival in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We assessed the cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib compared with sorafenib for patients with advanced HCC in Australia.
methodA partitioned-survival model was built to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing lenvatinib and sorafenib from an Australian health-system perspective. Survival curves were obtained from the REFLECT trial and fitted with parametric survival functions for extrapolation purposes beyond the trial follow-up. Cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were accrued over the 10-year time horizon of the model. Deterministic and probability sensitivity analysis (PSA) were carried out to verify the validity of the model.
resultsLenvatinib incurred higher costs (A$96,325) and superior health outcomes (QALYs: 1.205), while sorafenib had lower costs (A$92,394) and inferior health outcomes (QALYs: 1.086). Thus, lenvatinib yielded an incremental cost-utility ratio of A$33,028/QALY gained. Further, the results of the PSA found that the probability of lenvatinib being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of A$50,000/QALY was 64%.
conclusionOur study found that, at current prices, lenvatinib is a cost-effective treatment option compared with sorafenib for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced HCC.
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.