ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Adding capivasertib to fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preclinical Rationale, Clinical Efficacy, and Safety of the Selective AKT Kinase Inhibitor Capivasertib in Metastatic Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Breast Carcinoma: A Practical Narrative Review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Review
- Fuzuloparib with or without apatinib in patients with HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer with germline BRCA1/2 mutations: a cost-utility analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Capivasertib cost-effectiveness in treating advanced breast cancer: A US health care perspective.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
- Clinical implications of Alu-based cell-free DNA and serum onco-piRNA monitoring in colorectal cancer management.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line versus second-line use of CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy in advanced HR+/HER2- breast cancer in China: based on the SONIA trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Capivasertib, a novel pan-AKT inhibitor, shows significant antitumor activity against hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. However, its cost-effectiveness of this treatment remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of capivasertib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant alone for advanced breast cancer treatment from the perspectives of healthcare payers in the United States. Meanwhile, a experimental analysis from the perspective of China, incorporating specific assumptions, was also conducted in this study. Methods: A partitioned survival model was constructed to project the progression of breast cancer. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) data were obtained from the CAPItello-291 trial and extrapolated for long-term survival estimates. Direct medical costs and utility data were gathered. The primary outcome measure was incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment regimen. One-way sensitivity analyses (OWSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to assess the robustness of the results. Results: The base-case analysis estimated the ICUR for capivasertib plus fulvestrant versus fulvestrant alone to be $709,647 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in the US. OWSA revealed that the results were sensitive to hazard ratio of OS and the cost of capivasertib. PSA demonstrated that capivasertib plus fulvestrant exhibited a 0% probability of cost-effectiveness in the US. Conclusion: Our finding suggests that, at its current price, capivasertib plus fulvestrant regimen is unlikely to be a cost-effective option compared to fulvestrant alone for HR-positive advanced breast cancer patients from the perspective of healthcare system in the US. For the experimental analysis based on specific assumptions from Chinese perspective, the therapy regimen was also found to lack cost-effectiveness.
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.