ArticleFrontiers in public health2023
Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy is more cost-effective than chemotherapy alone as first-line therapy for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The safety and efficacy of tislelizumab, alone or in combination with chemotherapy, for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review of clinical trials.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Predictive value analysis of CEA, CA125 and CYFRA21-1 levels in evaluating the efficacy of tislelizumab combined with gemcitabine-cisplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of carfilzomibFuture science OA · 2025Article
- A Rare Histologic Transformation from EGFR-Positive Lung Adenocarcinoma to EGFR-Negative Squamous Cell Carcinoma After EGFR-TKIs Resistance: A Case Report.OncoTargets and therapy · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: perspectives from the United States and China.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Article
- Cost‑effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy in Chinese patients with advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of camrelizumab plus paclitaxel and carboplatinFrontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Economics of first-line treatment with tislelizumab in patients with nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.Immunotherapy · 2024Article
- Article
- Tislelizumab Plus Chemotherapy Versus Placebo Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Chinese Patients with Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Clinical drug investigation · 2023Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Tislelizumab Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced or Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in China.Risk management and healthcare policy · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Tislelizumab is a programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor. Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy as first-line option for advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), compared with chemotherapy alone, resulted in significantly prolonged survival outcomes; however, evidence regarding its relative efficacy and cost is lacking. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy compared with that of chemotherapy alone, from the health care perspective in China. Methods: A partitioned survival model (PSM) was used for this study. The survival data were obtained from the RATIONALE 304 trial. Cost-effectiveness was defined as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) less than the willingness to pay (WTP) threshold. Incremental net health benefits (INHB), incremental net monetary benefits (INMB), and subgroup analyses were also assessed. Sensitivity analyses were further established to assess the model stability. Results: Compared with chemotherapy alone, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy increased by 0.64 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and 1.48 life-years, and yielded an increase of $16,631 in cost per patient. The INMB and INHB were $7,510 and 0.20 QALYs at a WTP threshold of $38,017/QALY, respectively. The ICER was $26,162/QALY. The outcomes were most sensitive to the HR of OS for tislelizumab plus chemotherapy arm. The probability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy being considered cost-effective was 87.66% and >50% in most of the subgroups at the WTP threshold of $38,017/QALY. At the WTP threshold of $86,376/QALY, the probability achieved 99.81%. Furthermore, the probability of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy being considered cost-effective in subgroups of patients with liver metastases and PD-L1 expression ≥50% were 90.61 and 94.35%, respectively. Conclusion: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy is likely to be cost-effective as a first-line treatment for advanced non-squamous NSCLC in China.
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.