Trial reportFrontiers in public health2022
Cost-effectiveness analysis of sugemalimab vs. placebo, in combination with chemotherapy, for treatment of first-line metastatic NSCLC in China.
Trial report 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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of immunotherapies for advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2024Pooled it
- An Exploratory Cost-Utility Analysis of Screening and Treating Immigrants in Canada for Hepatitis D.Journal of viral hepatitis · 2026Article
- Article
- Economic Evaluation of Penpulimab Plus Paclitaxel and Carboplatin Combination Therapy as First-Line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Squamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in China.Clinical drug investigation · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Pembrolizumab With Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Cervical Cancer.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Sugemalimab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy for treatment of Chinese patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a cost effectiveness analysis to inform decision making.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Cost-effective analysis of sugemalimab plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma with PD-L1 CPS ≥5.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- The Cost-Effectiveness of Sugemalimab Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Squamous and Non-squamous NSCLC in China.Advances in therapy · 2023Article
- A trial-based cost-utility analysis of sugemalimab vs. placebo as consolidation therapy for unresectable stage III NSCLC in China.PloS one · 2023Article
- Economic evaluation of toripalimab combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of sugemalimab plus chemotherapy (SC) vs. placebo plus chemotherapy (PC), as the first-line treatment for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in China. Material and methods: A three-state Markov model with a cycle of 3 weeks was built to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of SC vs. PC as first-line treatment for patients with NSCLC over a 10-year horizon from Chinese health care perspective. Time-dependency transition probability and safety data were derived from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial performed in China (GEMSTONE-302). Primary model outcomes included the costs in US dollars and health outcomes in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the ICER under a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $37,663/QALYs. Deterministic, scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were employed to investigate the robustness of model outcomes. Results: In base-case analysis, compared with PC, first-line SC for intention-to-treat (ITT) population gained an additional 0.57 QALYs with an incremental cost of $62,404.15, resulting in an ICER of $109,480.97/QALYs gained. When a patient assistance program (PAP) was available, the ICER decreased to $52,327.02/QALYs. In subgroup analysis, the ICER values were above the WTP threshold with or without PAP. Sensitivity analysis results suggested that the model outcomes were reliable. Conclusion: From the perspective of Chinese healthcare system, the SC was not cost-effective in comparison to PC as first-line treatment for NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 tumor expression level and pathological subtype.
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.