ArticleCancer medicine2022
Cost-effectiveness of osimertinib versus placebo in resected EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer in China.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- An updated cost-effectiveness analysis of osimertinib versus placebo in resected EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: the perspective of the United States.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Osimertinib With and Without Chemotherapy for Surgically Resected NSCLC.JTO clinical and research reports · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Adjuvant Alectinib versus Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Resected ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in the Chinese Health Care System.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Osimertinib in the treatment of resected EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of osimertinib versus placebo in resected EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer in China.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe aim to assess whether osimertinib postoperative adjuvant therapy, compared with placebo, is cost-effective in China.
methodsWe set up the Markov model that contains three health states over a 20-year period. Data were collected from the ADAURA trial that included transition probabilities and safety data. Through the analysis of literature and local charges, we explore both the cost and utility values. Sensitivity analyses were employed using TreeAge Pro software to access model stability.
findingsPatients in the osimertinib group had 1.46 more Quality-adjusted Life Years (8.45 QALYs vs 6.99 QALYs) than the placebo group at an incremental cost of $14098.51($39962.99 vs $25864.48). Compared with the placebo group, the treatment strategy with osimertinib postoperative adjuvant therapy had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $9661.97/QALY. The probability of the osimertinib-assisted therapy strategy being cost-effective will reach 100% if the threshold of willingness to pay is above $15,000/QALY. IMPLICATIONS: From the perspective of the Chinese Healthcare System, the treatment strategy with osimertinib postoperative adjuvant therapy is more cost-effective than the placebo strategy.
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.