ArticleFuture science OA2025
Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of carfilzomib
Article in Future science OA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveThis study assesses the cost-effectiveness of carfilzomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (KRd)
methodsA survival model was used to analyze health states and costs over a lifetime, with a 4-week cycle. Treatment effects on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were modeled using hazard ratios (HRs) derived from the network meta-analysis (NMA). Health state utility values and disutility values for adverse events were obtained from published literature. Direct medical costs included drug costs, disease management costs, and costs associated with adverse event management. Costs and utilities were discounted by 5% annually. Both one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.
resultsThe carfilzomib combination was found to be cost-effective, saving $127,513.22 per additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained compared to the ixazomib combination. Sensitivity analysis showed that ixazomib's price, progression state utility, and carfilzomib's price significantly affected the results. At a $40,023.27 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold, the carfilzomib combination has a 100% probability of being cost-effective.
conclusionsThe study shows that, based on evidence from indirect comparisons, KRd is a cost-effective treatment option for RRMM patients in China.
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.