ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer ineligible for platinum-based doublet chemotherapy.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of lurbinectedin plus atezolizumab as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Atezolizumab has recently demonstrated improved prognosis in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who are not eligible for treatment with a platinum-containing regimen, as observed in a randomized phase 3 clinical trial. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of atezolizumab for the treatment of NSCLC from the perspective of payers in both developed and developing countries. Materials and methods: A Markov model was developed to simulate treatment scenarios involving atezolizumab or chemotherapy for patients diagnosed with NSCLC. The model estimated the transition probabilities, health care costs, and health utilities base on the risk of disease progression, survival, and toxicity using data from IPSOS clinical trials, relevant literature, and publicly available databases. A price simulation was conducted to guide the pricing strategy at the specified willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold, and sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the model's response to uncertainty. Results: Among patients with NSCLC who are not suitable for treatment with a platinum-containing regimen, the use of atezolizumab led to an incremental gain of 0.35 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) compared to chemotherapy. The ICER for atezolizumab compared to chemotherapy was calculated at $220400.53 per QALY in the US and $101874.61 per QALY in China. The price simulation results indicated that atezolizumab was favored in the US when the price was less than $371.28/60 mg and $474.92/60 mg at the WTP thresholds of $100,000 and $150,000, respectively; it was cost-effective at a WTP threshold of $36023.71when the price was about 40% of the current price in China. Sensitivity analysis revealed that variables such as the price of atezolizumab and utilities influenced the r model's outcomes, although these factors did not significantly alter the overall conclusion. Conclusion: Atezolizumab was not considered cost-effective at the WTP thresholds of $150,000 per QALY in the US and $36,024 per QALY in China for patients with advanced NSCLC who are ineligible for platinum-based chemotherapy.
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.