ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021
First-Line Treatments for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Plus Chemotherapy: A Network Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.
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 34 papers, 4 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety evaluation of PD-1/PD-L1 therapies for treatment of NSCLC: a systematic review, bayesian network meta-analysis, and cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Which Is More Suitable for First-Line Treatment of Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer, PD-L1 Inhibitors Versus PD-1 Inhibitors? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.The clinical respiratory journal · 2024Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of the combination of immunotherapy and chemotherapy for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Safety evaluation of immune checkpoint inhibitors combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Thoracic cancer · 2023Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of sugemalimab vs. placebo, in combination with chemotherapy, for treatment of first-line metastatic NSCLC in China.Frontiers in public health · 2022Trial
- Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of first-line tislelizumab for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer using a comparative validation of traditional survival and machine learning models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of first-line aumolertinib versus osimertinib for advanced epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated non-small cell lung cancer in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of penpulimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel as first-line treatment for metastatic squamous non-small-cell lung cancer in China.Health economics review · 2025Article
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Immune checkpoint blockers plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic squamous non-small-cell lung carcinoma: a network meta-analysis and economic evaluation.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Durvalumab consolidation therapy in patients with stage III small cell lung cancer after concurrent chemoradiation: a China-based cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- First-line chemotherapy with tislelizumab for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Review
- First-line treatments for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer with immune checkpoint inhibitors plus chemotherapy: a China-based cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of aumolertinib as first-line treatment for EGFR-mutated advanced nonsmall-cell lung cancer.Future oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of amivantamab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in NSCLC with EGFR Exon 20 insertions.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) plus chemotherapy were unlikely to be considered cost-effective compared with chemotherapy as the first-line treatment of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in China due to its high costs. However, the cost-effectiveness of the comparison between the regimens of ICIs plus chemotherapy were remained unclear yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ICIs plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for ES-SCLC from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.
methodsA network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to indirect compare the clinical benefits between the ICIs plus chemotherapy regimens. A decision-analytic model was established to evaluate the cost-effectiveness from the Chinese healthcare system, the clinical efficacy and safety data were obtained from the clinical trials and the results of NMA. Cost and utility values were gathered from the local charges and previously studies. Key outputs of the NMA were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the robustness of the model outcomes.
resultsFive clinical trials (IMpower133, CASPIAN, KEYNOTE-604, CA184-156, and EA5161) of 1,255 patients received first-line ICIs plus chemotherapy strategies were analyzed in the NMA. NMA showed that nivolumab plus chemotherapy was ranked higher than other strategies. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy achieved relatively higher health benefits and lower costs. One-way sensitivity analyses revealed that the cost of ICIs had the substantial impact on model outcomes. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that the probability of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy could be considered cost-effective was more than 50% at the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $31,313/QALY in China. In scenario analyses, when the price of nivolumab reduced 80%, the probability of nivolumab plus chemotherapy being cost-effective was more than 50%.
conclusionsThe NMA and cost-effectiveness revealed that atezolizumab plus chemotherapy is the most favorable first-line treatment for previously untreated ES-SCLC patients compared other ICIs plus chemotherapy regimens in China. The price reduction of nivolumab would make nivolumab plus chemotherapy be the most cost-effective option in future possible context.
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.