ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Cost-effectiveness analysis of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib in first line treatment for Chinese subpopulation with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic evaluation of finotonlimab plus bevacizumab as first-line therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.PloS one · 2026Article
- Characterizing immune profiles in hepatocellular carcinoma patients benefiting from pembrolizumab and lenvatinib using machine learning.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparing health insurance-reimbursed lenvatinib and self-paid atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Economic evaluation of anlotinib plus penpulimab vs. sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Hepatic Arterial Chemotherapy for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in China: A Comparative Analysis of HAIC-FO and Sorafenib.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the context of regional disparities in China.Frontiers in oncology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo-bev) versus sorafenib treatment in Taiwan. Methods: Using sorafenib as the comparator, we developed a partitioned survival model to evaluate the costs and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of the atezo-bev treatment. The time horizon of the study was 15 years, and the annual discount rate was 3%. We analyzed the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) from the treatment effects (determined from the progression-free and overall survival outcomes of the IMbrave150 study), direct medical costs (collected and estimated from the National Health Insurance Research Database, Taiwan), and utility parameters (referred to the NICE technology appraisal guidance), as well as the deterministic sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity. Results: Compared with sorafenib, the incremental effectiveness of atezo-bev treatment was 1.7 QALY, with an incremental cost of USD 127,607. The ICER was USD 75,192 per QALY, which was less than the predefined willingness to pay in Taiwan. Conclusion: The combined treatment of atezo-bev is cost-effective when compared with sorafenib, which is currently the first-line treatment option for unresectable HCC in Taiwan.
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.