ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2025
Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced endometrial cancer: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 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 economic value of mismatch repair-guided immunotherapy in endometrial cancer: companion testing and patient selection.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Recent therapeutic advances in gynecologic oncology: evolving roles of immunotherapy, antibody-drug conjugates, and clinical trial innovations.Frontiers in oncology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRecently, NRG-GY018 clinical trial demonstrated that adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy led to significantly longer progression-free survival than chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (a/rEC). This analysis aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin chemotherapy (PC) as the first-line treatment for a/rEC in the US and China.
methodsA Markov model based on the clinical data from NRG-GY018 trial was established to estimate the cost and efficacy of PC and paclitaxel plus carboplatin groups for a/rEC in mismatch repair-proficient (pMMR) and mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) populations. Direct medical costs and utility values were collected from the government databases, local databases, and published literatures. The main outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), incremental monetary benefit (INMB), and incremental net-health benefit (INHB). The robustness of the model was assessed using one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.
resultsWith the 5-year time horizon, treatment with PC gained an additional 0.87 QALYs (1.34 LYs) in pMMR and 4.17 QALYs (5.14 LYs) in the dMMR population. In the US, the ICERs of PC compared to chemotherapy were 404,575 $/QALY in pMMR and 124,406 $/QALY in dMMR patients, respectively. In China, the ICERs of PC compared to chemotherapy were 220,259 $/QALY and 70,207 $/QALY in pMMR and dMMR populations, respectively. The results of sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of our models.
conclusionsFor patients with a/rEC, PC was cost-effective compared with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment for dMMR populations in the US. However, the combination of pembrolizumab with chemotherapy was not a cost-effective strategy for pMMR a/rEC in the US and a/rEC in China regardless of the MMR status, a price reduction process is required to reach the traditional cost-effectiveness threshold.
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.