SynthesisBMC cancer2024
Cost-effectiveness of immunotherapies for advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2024. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of perioperative durvalumab plus FLOT for resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in the United States.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Economic Impact of Targeted and Immunotherapies in Treating Operable Esophageal and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers.Annals of thoracic surgery short reports · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of penpulimab combined with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment for advanced squamous non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- OncoPSM: an interactive tool for cost-effectiveness analysis using partitioned survival models in oncology trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Sugemalimab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy for treatment of Chinese patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a cost effectiveness analysis to inform decision making.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of gumarontinib versus savolitinib for the treatment of advanced or metastatic NSCLC with MET exon 14 skipping mutations in China using partitioned survival model.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Deubiquitinating enzyme USP28 inhibitor AZ1 alone and in combination with cisplatin for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of camrelizumab-based comprehensive treatment for non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are differences in the pharmacoeconomics of Immune checkpoint blocking (ICB) therapies for the treatment of lung squamous cell carcinoma (LSCC). However, no corresponding review studies have fully discussed the cost-effectiveness of ICBs in treating LSCC. The aim of this paper is to systematically review and evaluate all available pharmacoeconomic studies of ICBs for LSCC.
methodThe inclusion criteria were based on the population, intervention, comparator, outcomes, and study designs. An electronic search was conducted by June 2023, and the following databases were used: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Search keywords included 'Carcinoma', Non-Small-Cell Lung', 'Immunotherapy', and 'Economics, Medical'. The primary outcome was the cost-effectiveness analysis of ICB therapy in LSCC patients. Drummond Checklist was used to assess quality problems and possible bias in the study design of included pharmacoeconomic studies.
resultsThis review searched 15 articles on the economic evaluation of ICB treatment for LSCC. After a qualitative review of 15 studies, we concluded that nivolumab is more cost-effective as a monotherapy than chemotherapy alone. In the combination regimen, pembrolizumab combined with chemotherapy appears to be the most cost-effective option at present, but for Chinese payers with LSCC, locally developed treatments such as sintilimab or toripalimab in combination with chemotherapy are more cost-effective. DISCUSSION: The inclusion of economic evaluation has heterogeneity in research design and outcomes, which can only support qualitative synthesis. Therefore, The results of this paper need to be treated with caution. For the Chinese market, instead of imported drugs, the possible cost-effectiveness of locally developed ICB therapies should be the focus of future research.
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.