ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2025
Cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy in advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer.
Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Contribution of Dostarlimab to First-Line Treatment of Advanced or Recurrent Endometrial Cancer in Spain: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To review the cost-effectiveness of chemotherapy and immunotherapy-based regimens for advanced and recurrent endometrial cancer, focusing on incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Methods: We conducted a literature review of peer-reviewed studies (2021-2025) evaluating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) combined with chemotherapy or targeted agents versus standard chemotherapy in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer. Key outcomes (cost per QALY or life-year gained, willingness-to-pay [WTP] thresholds) and conclusions were extracted from nine studies. Results: Adding ICIs to first-line chemotherapy improved survival, especially in mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) tumors. In dMMR disease, pembrolizumab or dostarlimab plus chemotherapy yielded ICERs of $41,000-$60,000/QALY, considered cost-effective at a $150,000/QALY threshold, but not at $100,000/QALY without price reductions. In mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) patients, first-line ICI combinations showed smaller QALY gains and higher ICERs ($90,000-$176,000/QALY), often exceeding accepted thresholds. The durvalumab + olaparib combination was not cost-effective in any subgroup (ICERs >$200,000/QALY). In recurrent pMMR disease, pembrolizumab + lenvatinib was not cost-effective in U.S. or Chinese settings unless drug costs declined by 8-50 %. In recurrent dMMR cancer, dostarlimab improved outcomes but had an ICER of $332,000/QALY, making it economically unjustified at current prices. Conclusions: ICIs offer clinical benefit in advanced endometrial cancer, particularly in dMMR tumors. First-line ICI + chemotherapy appears cost-effective for dMMR at U.S. WTP levels. However, use in pMMR or second-line settings may require drug price reductions or biomarker-based selection to be economically viable.
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.