ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2024
Comparative cost-effectiveness of nivolumab first-line and second-line therapy for advanced esophageal cancer in Japan.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multinational cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Immune checkpoint inhibitorsTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveA model-based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing first-line and second-line nivolumab therapy for advanced esophageal cancer was performed to support public healthcare in Japan.
methodsA partitioned survival model was developed to predict costs and outcomes. Survival data were obtained from two phase 3 clinical trials (Attraction-3 and Checkmate-648), and direct medical costs were estimated from the perspective of the Japanese National Health Insurance payer. The time horizon for the model was set to 20 years. Health outcomes were calculated and defined as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were compared to those of control therapy. A sensitivity analysis was performed based on parameter settings and model uncertainties. A willingness-to-pay threshold of 15 million Japanese yen (JPY) was established.
resultsCompared to that of each control therapy, the ICER for nivolumab per QALY gained was 15,712,265 JPY (143,099 USD) for first-line combination therapy with chemotherapy in the overall population, 10,657,085 JPY (97,059 USD) in the population with ≥ 1% Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression, and 41,184,322 JPY (375,085 USD) for second-line nivolumab monotherapy. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis estimated that nivolumab was cost-effective as a first-line therapy for the overall population (61.5%) and for the population with ≥ 1% PD-L1 expression (76.5%), but not as second-line monotherapy (32.3%).
conclusionNivolumab is recommended as a first-line therapy in combination with chemotherapy owing to its cost-effectiveness, but not as a second-line monotherapy. Patient selection based on PD-L1 expression may help to improve the cost-effectiveness of using nivolumab as a first-line treatment.
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.