Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33767976›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Hepatic Arterial Infusion of FOLFOX Combined Sorafenib for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma With Portal Vein Invasion.

Meiyue Li, Shen Lin, Leslie Wilson, Pinfang Huang, Hang Wang, Shubin Lai, Liangliang Dong, Xiongwei Xu, Xiuhua Weng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Meiyue LiDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Shen LinDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Leslie WilsonDepartments of Medicine and Pharmacy, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.
Pinfang HuangDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Hang WangDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Shubin LaiDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Liangliang DongDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Xiongwei XuDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
Xiuhua WengDepartment of Pharmacy, First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Fuzhou, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University · CNFujian Medical University · CNUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and fluorouracil (FOLFOX) plus sorafenib has a more desirable effect versus sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with portal vein invasion. However, considering the high cost of hepatic arterial infusion of chemotherapy (HAIC), this study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of HAIC plus sorafenib (SoraHAIC) versus standard care for HCC patients from the Chinese health system perspective.

methodsA Markov multi-state model was constructed to simulate the disease course and source consumption of SoraHAIC. Costs of primary therapeutic drugs were calculated based on the national bid price, and hepatic artery catheterization fee was collected from the Fujian Provincial Price Bureau. Clinical data, other costs, and utility values were extracted from references. Primary outcomes included life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of model was verified by uncertainty sensitivity analyses.

resultsSoraHAIC gained 1.18 QALYs (1.68 LYs) at a cost of $65,254, while the effectiveness and cost of sorafenib were 0.52 QALYs (0.79 LYs) and $14,280, respectively. The ICER of SoraHAIC vs sorafenib was $77,132/QALY ($57,153/LY). Parameter that most influenced the ICER was utility of PFS state. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) showed that SoraHAIC was not cost-effective in the WTP threshold of 3*Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of China ($30,492/QALY). But about 38.8% of the simulations were favorable to SoraHAIC at the WTP threshold of 3*GDP per capita of Beijing ($72,000/QALY). When 3*GDP per capita of Fujian ($47,285/QALY) and Gansu Province ($14,595/QALY) were used as WTP threshold, the acceptability of SoraHAIC was 0.3% and 0%, respectively.

conclusionsThe study results indicated that SoraHAIC was not cost-effective in medium-, and low-income regions of China. In developed areas of China (Beijing), there was a 38.8% probability that the SoraHAIC regimen would be cost-effective.

Indexed as

combination therapycost-effectiveness analysisFOLFOXhepatic arterial infusion chemotherapyhepatocellular carcinomasorafenib

Identifiers

PMID33767976
PMCPMC7985441
OpenAlexW3134157255

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.