ArticleCancer medicine2024
Cost-effectiveness analysis of osimertinib plus chemotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pharmacoeconomic Analysis of Osimertinib Compared to Earlier-Generation EGFR Inhibitors in EGFR-Mutated NSCLC: A Systematic Review.Cancer medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Economics, efficacy and safety of five traditional Chinese medicine injections plus chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy for non-small cell lung cancer: A network meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Pooled it
- Central nervous system efficacy of third generationJournal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Should we optimise or revise the management of initially unresectable stage III non-small cell lung cancer: rethinking consolidation therapy.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2026Article
- Precision in Pharmacoeconomics: A Comparative Cost-Utility Analysis of Osimertinib in EGFR-Mutant NSCLC Using Traditional and Pharmacometric Models.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
- Cost Effectiveness of Osimertinib with Chemotherapy Compared to Osimertinib Monotherapy and First-Generation EGFR-TKIs in Advanced NSCLC in the USA.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Article
- First Line and Treatment Sequencing in EGFR-Mutated Metastatic NSCLC: What is Right for Which Patient?Drugs · 2026Review
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of pembrolizumab plus trastuzumab and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for HER2-positive gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of first-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy versus amivantamab plus lazertinib for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC in the US and China.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
- Adagrasib in the treatment of KRASTranslational cancer research · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of rilertinib versus osimertinib in second-line treatment in EGFR T790M resistance mutation advanced non-small cell lung cancer in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of osimertinib plus chemotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.Cancer medicine · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionFirst-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy significantly prolonged progression-free survival of patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) compared to osimertinib, according to the FLAURA2 trial.
methodsWe established a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of osimertinib plus chemotherapy with that of osimertinib alone. Clinical data were obtained from the FLAURA and FLAURA2 trials, and additional data were extracted from online resources and publications. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the findings. We used A willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The main outcomes were QALYs, overall costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net monetary benefit, and incremental net health benefit. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to patients' mutation type and central nervous system (CNS) metastatic status.
resultsIn a 20-year time horizon, the ICER of osimertinib plus chemotherapy versus osimertinib alone was $223,727.1 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analyses identified the cost of osimertinib and the hazard ratio for overall survival as the top 2 influential factors and a 1.9% probability of osimertinib plus chemotherapy to be cost-effective. The subgroup analyses revealed ICERs of $132,614.1, $224,449.8, $201,464.1, and $130,159.7 per QALY gained for L858R mutations, exon 19 deletions, CNS metastases, and no CNS metastases subgroups, respectively.
conclusionsFrom the perspective of the United States health care system, osimertinib plus chemotherapy is not cost-effective compared to osimertinib alone for treatment-naïve patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC, but more favorable cost-effectiveness occurs in patients with L858R mutations and patients without baseline CNS metastases.
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.