ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2023
Cost-effectiveness analysis of anlotinib as a third-line or further treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer in China.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib versus placebo for advanced neuroendocrine tumors from crossover-adjusted analysis in the United States and China.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line gefitinib plus anlotinib treatment for patients with stage IIIB-IV EGFR-mutated NSCLC in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of trastuzumab deruxtecan as a second-line treatment for HER2-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of benmelstobart and anlotinib plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- TQB2450 with or without anlotinib as maintenance treatment in subjects with locally advanced/unresectable non-small cell lung cancer that have not progressed after prior concurrent/sequential chemoradiotherapy (R-ALPS): study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III trial.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of Kang Ai injection plus chemotherapy vs. Shenqi Fuzheng injection plus chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Etoposide soft capsule combined with anlotinib in the third-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The health expenditure on treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is enormous, especially in third-line or further therapy. Cost-effectiveness analysis for the treatment of advanced NSCLC is particularly important. Anlotinib has been approved by the China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA) for the third-line or further treatment of advanced NSCLC. The price of anlotinib in China fell in 2022. Thus, this study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of anlotinib in the third-line or further treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC based on the newest price from the Chinese health-care system perspective. Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and effectiveness of anlotinib and a placebo in the third-line or further treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC based on outcome data from the ALTER 0303 phase-3 randomized clinical trial, which included 437 patients with advanced NSCLC and investigated the efficacy of anlotinib. The lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the model uncertainty. Results: Anlotinib provided an additional 0.1161 QALYs compared to the placebo. The corresponding incremental cost was ¥22,729. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of anlotinib compared to the placebo was ¥195,768 per QALY. From the perspective of the Chinese health-care system, anlotinib was found to be cost-effective compared to the placebo in the third-line or further treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of ¥242,928 per QALY. Moreover, 1-way sensitivity analysis found that the results were sensitive to the utility of progressive disease (PD). The lower this parameter was, the higher the probability of ICER for anlotinib not being cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed that the base-case analysis results were relatively stable. Conclusions: Considering the clinical efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of anlotinib, it may be a valuable third-line or further treatment for advanced 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.