Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35309225›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Pembrolizumab in Patients With Advanced Esophageal Cancer Based on the KEYNOTE-181 Study.

Mei Zhan, Ting Xu, Hanrui Zheng, Zhiyao He

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Immune checkpoint inhibitorsTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mei ZhanDepartment of Pharmacy, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ting XuDepartment of Pharmacy, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Hanrui ZhengDepartment of Pharmacy, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Zhiyao HeDepartment of Pharmacy, State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy and Cancer Center, National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
State Key Laboratory of BiotherapySichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Purpose: The KEYNOTE-181 study demonstrated that pembrolizumab for advanced or metastatic esophageal cancer in patients with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 10 had a survival advantage and better tolerability than chemotherapy. However, at the same time, pembrolizumab places an economic burden on patients. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab based on the KEYNOTE181 study. Materials and Methods: A three-state Markov model [progression-free survival (PFS), progressive disease (PD), and death] based on data from the KEYNOTE-181 study was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for advanced or metastatic esophageal cancer. The model evaluates the outcomes from the Chinese society's perspective. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the ICER in terms of 2021 US$ per QALY gained, were calculated. one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the model robustness. Results: Compared with chemotherapy, pembrolizumab increased costs by $37,201.68, while gaining 0.23 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $163,165.26 per QALY in patients with PD-L1 CPS ≥ 10. The ICER is $202,708.62 per QALY and $163,643.19 per QALY in the total population and patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, respectively. The ICER was much higher than the commonly accepted willingness-to-pay threshold ($11,105.8 per QALY). One-way and sensitivity analyses showed that the costs of pembrolizumab and the utility of PD were the crucial factors in determining the ICER, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated pembrolizumab is unlikely to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $11,105.8 per QALY. The result was robust across sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: Pembrolizumab is not a cost-effective treatment option for the second-line treatment of esophageal cancer from the perspective of Chinese society.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsB7-H1 AntigenCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedB7-H1 Antigenpembrolizumabchemotherapycost-effectivenessesophageal cancerPD-L1pembrolizumab

Identifiers

PMID35309225
PMCPMC8924414
OpenAlexW4214917390

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.