Trial reportJournal for immunotherapy of cancer2024
Cost-effectiveness of treating advanced melanoma with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes based on an international randomized phase 3 clinical trial.
Trial report in Journal for immunotherapy of cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The cost-effectiveness of tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte cell therapy for advanced melanoma: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Adoptive cell therapies in thoracic malignancies: a comprehensive review.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy in melanoma: ready for prime time?British journal of cancer · 2026Review
- Advances in cell therapy for solid tumours: European perspective and future directions.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Review
- Rational use of expensive medicines in the Netherlands: strategies to improve effectiveness and reduce burden on patients and society - a narrative review.BMC medicine · 2026Review
- Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Cancer: Unveiling Parallels in Epidemiology, Clinical Pathways, and Therapeutic Strategies.Journal of market access & health policy · 2026Article
- Does tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte therapy improve survival outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma?Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The Feasibility of Combining Cost-Effectiveness, Bayesian Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression Techniques When Evaluating Melanoma Treatment Methods.OncoTargets and therapy · 2026Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Current Therapeutic Strategies for Melanoma.Current treatment options in oncology · 2025Review
- The science of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL): perspectives from the SITC Surgery Committee.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Review
- Advancements in Melanoma Treatment: A Review of PD-1 Inhibitors, T-VEC, mRNA Vaccines, and Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocyte Therapy in an Evolving Landscape of Immunotherapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Art of TIL immunotherapy: SITC's perspective on demystifying a complex treatment.Journal for immunotherapy of cancer · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn a multicenter, open-label randomized phase 3 clinical trial conducted in the Netherlands and Denmark, treatment with ex vivo-expanded tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL-NKI/CCIT) from autologous melanoma tumor compared with ipilimumab improved progression-free survival in patients with unresectable stage IIIC-IV melanoma after failure of first-line or second-line treatment. Based on this trial, we conducted a cost-utility analysis.
methodsA Markov decision model was constructed to estimate expected costs (expressed in 2021€) and outcomes (quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) of TIL-NKI/CCIT versus ipilimumab in the Netherlands. The Danish setting was assessed in a scenario analysis. A modified societal perspective was applied over a lifetime horizon. TIL-NKI/CCIT production costs were estimated via activity-based costing. Through sensitivity analyses, uncertainties and their impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were assessed.
resultsMean total undiscounted lifetime benefits were 4.47 life years (LYs) and 3.52 QALYs for TIL-NKI/CCIT and 3.33 LYs and 2.46 QALYs for ipilimumab. Total lifetime undiscounted costs in the Netherlands were €347,168 for TIL-NKI/CCIT (including €67,547 for production costs) compared with €433,634 for ipilimumab. Undiscounted lifetime cost in the Danish scenario were €337,309 and €436,135, respectively. This resulted in a dominant situation for TIL-NKI/CCIT compared with ipilimumab in both countries, meaning incremental QALYs were gained at lower costs. Survival probabilities, and utility in progressive disease affected the ICER most.
conclusionBased on the data of a randomized phase 3 trial, treatment with TIL-NKI/CCIT in patients with unresectable stage IIIC-IV melanoma is cost-effective and cost-saving, both in the current Dutch and Danish setting. These findings led to inclusion of TIL-NKI/CCIT as insured care and treatment guidelines. Publicly funded development of the TIL-NKI/CCIT cell therapy shows realistic promise to further explore development of effective personalized treatment while warranting economic sustainability of healthcare systems.
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.