ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of a first-line treatment with cadonilimab plus platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in China: COMPASSION-16 trial.
Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Reporting of Validation Efforts for Cancer Health Economic Decision Models.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy for advanced and recurrent cervical cancer: a systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2025Pooled it
- Ivonescimab combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic cervical cancer: A case report and literature review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Review
- Cadonilimab plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of cadonilimab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment option in HER-2-negative advanced gastric cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of cadonilimab plus chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of HER2-negative advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of toripalimab plus chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: perspectives from the United States and China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Case Report: When dual immune checkpoint blockade strikes back: cadonilimab-induced hypersensitivity in solid tumors - a case series and review.Frontiers in immunology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The addition of cadonilimab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer. However, the economic value of using this novel therapy for this indication is currently unknown. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the addition of cadonilimab to first-line standard chemotherapy for patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer from the perspective of Chinese healthcare system. Methods: A partitioned survival model was constructed to compare the cost-effectiveness of cadonilimab versus placebo in patients enrolled in the COMPASSION-16 trial. Cost, life-year, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefit (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) were calculated for 2 treatment strategies. Sensitivity, scenario, and subgroup analyses, and value of information analysis (EVPI) were performed. Results: Cadonilimab provided an additional 1.18 QALYs and $89,528.64 compared with placebo, which resulted in an ICER of $75,944.56/QALY. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of $38,042.49/QALY, INHB was estimated to be -1.17 QALYs, while INMB amounted to -$44,681.55 and EVPI was calculated as $71.40/person. Sensitivity analyses revealed that the model was most sensitive to hazard ratio (HR) for OS and PFS, and the probability of cadonilimab being cost-effective was 0.70%. To achieve cost-effectiveness, the price of cadonilimab must be reduced by approximately 50%. Subgroup analysis found that all subgroups unfavored cadonilimab by varying the HR for OS and PFS. Scenario analyses showed using life-year as effectiveness, altering time horizon and selection of survival analysis did not reverse results. Conclusions: Although the use of cadonilimab resulted in clinical benefit, it was not deemed cost-effective as a first-line therapy for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in China. Lowering the price of cadonilimab may enhance its 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.