ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2025
Cost-utility analysis of
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessing Value for Money in Theranostic Nuclear Medicine: A Systematic Review.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Estimation of Future Patient Populations Eligible for Radioligand Therapies in the EU and the UK: A Modelling Study.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- PSMA-Targeted Radioligand Therapy Beyond the Post-Taxane Setting: A Review of Evidence Across the Prostate Cancer Spectrum.Cancers · 2026Review
- Impact of PSMA-Based Radiopharmaceuticals on the Clinical Management of Prostate Cancer.Cancers · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Article
- Insights from PSMAfore: impact on health-related quality of life.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Availability, accessibility, and economic feasibility of radionuclide therapies in Africa: a systematic review and quantitative infrastructure analysis.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2026Review
- Omics-Mediated Treatment for Advanced Prostate Cancer: Moving Towards Precision Oncology.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of
methodsCohort state-transition models were developed with (I) four health states (treatment, stable after treatment, progression, death) and (II) six health states (treatment, stable after treatment, third-line treatment after progression, stable after third-line treatment, next progression, death). Transition probabilities were derived from the VISION and TheraP trials, and quality-of-life data from the VISION and CARD trials. Costs were derived from statutory health insurance claims data (2019-2022). Models simulated a five-year horizon with one-month cycles, applying within-cycle correction and a 3% discount rate. Sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty.
resultsFor Model I, PRLT plus SoC compared to SoC incurred incremental costs of €27,200 per patient, with a gain of 0.39 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €69,418 per QALY gained. In Model II, PRLT plus SoC compared to cabazitaxel achieved incremental savings of €1,460 per patient and a QALY gain of 0.11, making it the dominant option.
conclusionAlthough Germany lacks an explicit willingness-to-pay threshold for interpreting the ICER of Model I, it falls within the range of other reimbursed cancer therapies. This suggests PRLT is cost-effective as second- or third-line treatment for mCRPC. Between 2019 and 2022, hospitals mainly used self-produced
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.