ArticleJCO oncology practice2021
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Selective Internal Radiotherapy With Yttrium-90 Versus Sorafenib in Locally Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adverse Event Costs and Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Anticancer Drugs: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Price Analysis of Systemic Therapies and Transarterial Radioembolization for Treatment of Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Journal of market access & health policy · 2025Article
- Advances and Emerging Techniques in Y-90 Radioembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Cancers · 2025Review
- Selective internal radiation therapy across Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stages of hepatocellular carcinoma: literature review.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2024Review
- Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Carbon-Ion Radiation Therapy and Transarterial Chemoembolization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Advances in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Cost-Utility Analysis of Non-Contrast Abbreviated Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance in Cirrhosis.Gut and liver · 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
- Prediction of Lung Shunt Fraction for Yttrium-90 Treatment of Hepatic Tumors Using Dynamic Contrast Enhanced MRI with Quantitative Perfusion Processing.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022Article
- Quality of Life and Cost Considerations: Y-90 Radioembolization.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2021Review
- Bi-Centric Independent Validation of Outcome Prediction after Radioembolization of Primary and Secondary Liver Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Clinical Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Healthcare Costs and Utilization for Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Patients Treated at a Large Referral Center in Washington State 2007-2018.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2021Article
- Effects of Trial Population Selection on Quality of Life and Healthcare Decision-Making: A Systematic Review and Example in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Radioembolization.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe recent sorafenib versus radioembolization in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (SARAH) and selective internal radiation therapy versus sorafenib in locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (SIRveNIB) trials showed no statistically significant difference in overall survival for randomization to selective internal radiotherapy (SIRT) versus sorafenib for locally advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, although SIRT was better tolerated. Given the high cost of both treatments, we investigated their comparative cost-effectiveness from a US healthcare sector perspective. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe constructed a state-transition microsimulation model to simulate patients allocated to SIRT versus sorafenib according to an intention-to-treat principle. Hazard rates of disease progression and death were based on pooled individual patient data generated from the SARAH and SIRveNIB trials' Kaplan-Meier curves. Inputs for adverse events, treatment adherence, and quality of life utility weights were derived from trial data as well. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates and literature. We performed probabilistic sensitivity analysis and estimated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a 5-year time horizon. We evaluated sensitivity to uncertainty of key model parameters.
resultsCosts were $78,859
conclusionSorafenib is unlikely to provide a gain in quality-adjusted survival compared with SIRT at an acceptable cost for the US healthcare sector. Only if the current price decreased by more than 50% would sorafenib be considered economically attractive.
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.