ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
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.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02897479 (A Phase II, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HMPL-504 in Locally Advanced/Metastatic MET-Mutation-Positive Pulmonary Sarcomatoid Carcinomas and Other Non-small Cell Lung Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
A Phase II, Open-label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of HMPL-504 in Locally Advanced/Metastatic MET-Mutation-Positive Pulmonary Sarcomatoid Carcinomas and Other Non-small Cell Lung Cancer
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Reporting of Validation Efforts for Cancer Health Economic Decision Models.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of tepotinib vs capmatinib as subsequent therapy in MET exon 14-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer.Lung cancer management · 2026Review
- MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutation in NSCLC: From Genomic Discovery to Biomarker-Guided Therapeutic Innovation.Current drug targets · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Both gumarontinib and savolitinib have demonstrated efficacy in treating non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with tumors harboring mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor gene exon 14 (METex14) skipping. However, the comparison of their efficacy and pharmacoeconomics profiles remains limited. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of gumarontinib versus savolitinib for the treatment of METex14 skipping NSCLC in China. Methods: A 3-state partitioned survival model (PSM) was developed with lifetime horizon from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. Survival inputs were based on an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison using individual patient data from GLORY trial to adjust for patient characteristics in NCT02897479. Costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 5%. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to explore model uncertainty. Results: Gumarontinib gained an additional 0.10 QALYs at an incremental cost of $1,893 compared to savolitinib, resulting in the ICERs of $19,243/QALY, which is below the threshold of 3 times the GDP Conclusion: Gumarontinib is a cost-effective option compared to savolitinib for METex14 skipping NSCLC in China.
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.