ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
Cost-effectiveness analysis of capecitabine maintenance therapy plus best supportive care vs. best supportive care alone as first-line treatment of newly diagnosed metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma.
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. It is linked to trial NCT02460419 (Maintenance Capecitabine Plus Best Supportive Care Versus Best Supportive Care for Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Maintenance Capecitabine Plus Best Supportive Care Versus Best Supportive Care for Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: a Multicenter, Randomised, Phase 3 Study.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maintenance treatment with oral anticancer agents after first-line chemotherapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Article
- Economic evaluation of Erdafitinib as a second-line treatment for advanced metastatic urothelial carcinoma: real-world data from the USA and prospective analysis from China.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with platinum-pretreated, recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal cancer.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Maintenance therapy with capecitabine after induction chemotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (mNPC) has been confirmed to be effective. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine as maintenance therapy for patients with mNPC from the Chinese payers' perspective. Methods: Markov model was conducted to simulate the disease progress and evaluated the economic and health outcomes of capecitabine maintenance plus best-supported care (CBSC) or best-supported care (BSC) alone for patients with mNPC. Survival data were derived from the NCT02460419 clinical trial. Costs and utilities were obtained from the standard fee database and published literature. Measured outcomes were total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years (LYs), incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), and incremental net-health benefit (INHB). Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess model robustness. Additional subgroup cost-effectiveness analyses were accomplished. Results: Throughout the course of the disease, the CBSC group provide an incremental cost of $9 734 and additional 1.16 QALYs (1.56 LYs) compared with the BSC group, resulting in an ICUR of $8 391/QALY and ICER of $6 240/LY. Moreover, the INHB was 0.89 QALYs, and the INMB was $32 034 at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $36 007/QALY. Subgroup analyses revealed that CBSC presented a positive trend of gaining an INHB in all subgroups compared with the BSC group. The results of sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of our model. Conclusion: Compared with BSC, after induction chemotherapy, CBSC as a first-line treatment was cost-effective for newly diagnosed mNPC. These results suggest capecitabine maintenance therapy after induction chemotherapy as a new option for patients with newly diagnosed mNPC.
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.