ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line tislelizumab plus chemotherapy for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer from the perspective of the healthcare system in China.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Real-World Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review of Comparative Cohort Studies.Current oncology reports · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis based on two models of sacituzumab tirumotecan versus platinum-based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) poses a formidable challenge due to its aggressive nature and poor prognosis. While immune checkpoint inhibitors have shown promise as part of first-line therapy, their cost-effectiveness and survival benefits in the Chinese healthcare system are not well understood. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of first-line tislelizumab combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for ES-SCLC. Methods: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis using a partitioned survival mode (PSM) to compare tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC. The model integrated survival estimates from the RATIONALE-312 Phase III clinical trial, direct medical costs, and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) sourced from the literature. We calculated 10-year cost per QALY gained from Chinese healthcare system perspective. The analysis of cost-effectiveness was benchmarked against a willingness-to-pay threshold three times of GDP per capita in China. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate parametric uncertainty and model robustness. Results: Compared to the chemotherapy alone group, the tislelizumab plus chemotherapy group resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$31,072.79 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), which is below the threshold of US$37,765 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the utility value of progression-free survival (PFS) is a principal determinant of the ICER, with the ratio fluctuating between $27,246 and $36,417 per QALY, well below the willingness-to-pay threshold. In scenario analyses, tislelizumab plus chemotherapy resulted in an ICER of US$ 38,665.59/QALY with PET-CT imaging (exceeding the $37,765/QALY threshold) but was cost-effective at US$ 30,076.37/QALY when imported topotecan was used as second-line treatment. Conclusion: Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy demonstrates cost-effectiveness in the first-line treatment of ES-SCLC in China. This study provides preliminary evidence for the economic value of tislelizumab in the treatment of ES-SCLC, supporting its consideration as a first-line therapeutic option.
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.