ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2022
Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab plus ipilimumab
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of nivolumab versus placebo for relapsed malignant mesothelioma.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Trial
- Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Cancer: Unveiling Parallels in Epidemiology, Clinical Pathways, and Therapeutic Strategies.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of neoadjuvant docetaxel plus androgen deprivation therapy before radical prostatectomy in high-risk localized prostate cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of HLX01 (HanlikangFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Pleural mesothelioma (PMe): The evolving molecular knowledge of a rare and aggressive cancer.Molecular oncology · 2024Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in untreated advanced pleural mesothelioma in the Chinese healthcare system.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Cost Effectiveness and Budget Impact of Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Platinum Plus Pemetrexed (with and Without Bevacizumab) in Patients with Unresectable Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma in Switzerland.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- ATG5 as biomarker for early detection of malignant mesothelioma.BMC research notes · 2023Article
- Analysis of new treatments proposed for malignant pleural mesothelioma raises concerns about the conduction of clinical trials in oncology.Journal of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cancers · 2022Article
- The STING agonist, DMXAA, reduces tumor vessels and enhances mesothelioma tumor antigen presentation yet blunts cytotoxic T cell function in a murine model.Frontiers in immunology · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NI) Methods: A 10-year partitioned survival model was constructed using survival and safety data from the CheckMate 743 clinical trial. The output metrics of the model included the patient's lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Only direct medical costs were considered. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the results. Results: Among all randomized patients, group NI had an ICER of $475,677/QALY relative to group C. Among patients with epithelioid histology, group NI had an ICER of $760,955/QALY. Among patients with non-epithelioid histology, group NI had an ICER of $418,348/QALY. The ICERs of all three populations exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold ($150,000). The results of one-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost of nivolumab had a great influence on the results. The results of probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the possibility of NI being more economical in all randomized patients and in patients with non-epidemiology histology was 0. In patients with epithelioid histology, the probability that NI had an economic advantage was 0.6%. Conclusions: From the perspective of US payers, in patients with unresectable MPM, NI has no economic advantage over C.
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.