ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024
Cost-effectiveness of first-line enfortumab vedotin in addition to pembrolizumab for metastatic urothelial carcinoma in the United States.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Indirect Comparison of Neoadjuvant Treatment Strategies for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: ddMVAC and Perioperative Durvalumab-Gemcitabine-Cisplatin Versus Gemcitabine-Cisplatin: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.International journal of cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of disitamab vedotin plus toripalimab versus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for HER2-expressing advanced urothelial cancer.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Quality of life with EV-302 in advanced urothelial carcinoma: lessons and implications.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Advances in the management of localized bladder cancers.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- First-line enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab versus nivolumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in metastatic urothelial cancer: a cost-effectiveness study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of disitamab vedotin plus toripalimab in HER2-expressing advanced urothelial carcinoma in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Article
- Updated cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line novel therapies in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma across the UK, US, and China.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Economic evaluation of Erdafitinib as a second-line treatment for advanced metastatic urothelial carcinoma: real-world data from the USA and prospective analysis from China.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Impact of Membranous Nectin-4 on Outcomes of Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.Cancers · 2025Article
- Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: The EV-302 trial found that the combination of enfortumab vedotin (EV) with pembrolizumab significantly improved survival for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). However, given the high cost of the drugs, there is a need to assess its value by considering both efficacy and cost. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of EV plus pembrolizumab as a first-line treatment for patients with mUC from the perspective of U.S. payers. Methods: A Markov model was developed to compare the lifetime costs and effectiveness of EV in combination with pembrolizumab with chemotherapy in the treatment of mUC patients from U.S. payer perspective. Life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), and lifetime costs were estimated. One-way, two-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate model uncertainty. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed. Results: Compared to chemotherapy, the combination of EV and pembrolizumab provided an additional 2.10 LYs and 1.72 QALYs, at an incremental cost of $962,240.8 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is $558,973 per QALY. Subgroup analysis indicated that patients ineligible for cisplatin treatment had a lower ICER compared to those who were eligible for cisplatin. Conclusions: From the perspective of US payers, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY, the combination of EV and pembrolizumab is estimated to not be cost-effective compared to traditional chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of mUC patients.
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.