Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36575331›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics2023

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of a New Second-Line Treatment Regimen for Advanced Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Biomarker-Driven Targeted Therapy of Pemigatinib Versus 5-FU Chemotherapy.

Chen-Han Chueh, Yi-Wen Tsai, Zi-Rong Chen, Ming-Neng Shiu, Yu-Wen Wen, Nai-Jung Chiang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chen-Han ChuehInstitute of Health and Welfare Policy, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 112304, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3337-2586
Yi-Wen TsaiInstitute of Health and Welfare Policy, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 112304, Taipei, Taiwan. ywtsai@nycu.edu.tw.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1422-7217
Zi-Rong ChenInstitute of Health and Welfare Policy, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 112304, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4777-6792
Ming-Neng ShiuInstitute of Health and Welfare Policy, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, 112304, Taipei, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1009-3696
Yu-Wen WenClinical Informatics and Medical Statistics Research Center, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7979-3845
Nai-Jung ChiangDepartment of Oncology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, 112201, Taipei, Taiwan. njchiang@vghtpe.gov.tw.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9292-0055
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University · TWChang Gung University · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends a second-line treatment of pemigatinib for patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) fusions/rearrangements and modified FOLFOX (mFOLFOX) for those without FGFR2 alterations. However, these regimens are not yet covered by Taiwa's National Health Insurance. This cost-effectiveness analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the pemigatinib/mFOLFOX regimen as the second-line treatment for advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma based on FGFR2 status in comparison with the regimen of fluorouracil chemotherapy and provided a cost-effectiveness analysis-based reference price for pemigatinib.

methodsA three-state partitioned survival model with a 5-year time horizon was constructed for patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma who did not respond to first-line therapy. Overall and progression-free survival functions of pemigatinib, mFOLFOX, and fluorouracil were estimated from the FIGHT-202, ABC-06, and NIFTY trials, respectively. The utility of health states and disutility of adverse events were obtained from the literature. The genetic testing fee and price of pemigatinib were set as the market price. Other costs related to advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma were calculated using National Health Insurance claims data. The willingness-to-pay threshold was three times the gross domestic product per capita in 2021 (NT$2,889,684). A 3% discount rate was applied to quality-adjusted life-years and costs. Scenario analyses included a gradual price reduction of pemigatinib, alternative survival models, application of a National Health Insurance payment conversion factor to non-medication costs, and consideration of life-years as effectiveness. A deterministic sensitivity analysis, probabilistic sensitivity analysis, and a value of information analysis were performed.

resultsThe new regimen provided an incremental 0.13 quality-adjusted life-years, with incremental costs of NT$459,697, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of NT$3,411,098 per quality-adjusted life-year and an incremental net monetary benefit of - NT$70,268. The new regimen was found to be 53.2% cost effective in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The expected value of uncertainty measured by the expected value of perfect information was NT$80,695/person. In scenario analyses, the incremental net monetary benefit was positive when the price of pemigatinib was reduced by 40% or more. When applying a conversion factor to non-medical costs, the probability of the new regimen being cost effective was slightly increased from 53.2 to 56.5% compared with the base-case analysis. The utility and the cost of the new regimen were the main drivers of uncertainty.

conclusionsAlthough the new second-line genetic-based and biomarker-driven regimen of pemigatinib/mFOLFOX appears not cost effective for patients with advanced intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma in the base-case analysis, our analysis suggests it is highly likely to be cost effective in the case of a 40% price reduction on pemigatinib.

Indexed as

CholangiocarcinomaCost-Effectiveness AnalysisBiomarkersCost-Benefit AnalysisFluorouracilHumansMorpholinesPyrimidinesPyrrolesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsBiomarkersFluorouracilMorpholinespemigatinibPyrimidinesPyrroles

Identifiers

PMID36575331
OpenAlexW4313236958

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.