ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2025
Effectiveness and cost analysis of liposomal irinotecan in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multicenter real-world study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 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.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of NALIRIFOX versus other first-line chemotherapy regimens in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective study.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Systemic chemotherapy is crucial for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC). It serves as a palliative chemotherapy for unresectable PAC and as a (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy for (borderline) resectable PAC. Survival benefits were found with the use of liposomal irinotecan combined with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (nal-IRI/5-FU/LV) in the global phase III NAPOLI-1 trial. However, limited evidence supports the cost-effectiveness of liposomal irinotecan throughout the PAC treatment course. Objectives: We investigated the real-world efficacy and cost implications of nal-IRI/5-FU/LV in PAC management. Design: A multicenter real-world study. Methods: We analyzed real-world data from electronic health records to evaluate outcomes of nal-IRI/5-FU/LV exposure in this retrospective study. Effectiveness was assessed using overall survival (OS). Medical costs were those incurred from imaging or laboratory tests, chemotherapy, surgery, radiotherapy, and supportive care during inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department visits. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for potential differences in patient characteristics between the nal-IRI and non-liposomal irinotecan groups. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated by dividing cost differences by survival gains. Results: Overall, 1734 patients diagnosed with PAC were screened, and 705 who received at least one cycle of chemotherapy were included in the analysis. The median OS was significantly longer in the nal-IRI group than in the non-liposomal irinotecan group (28.0 vs 18.3 months, Conclusion: Despite its higher cost, nal-IRI/5-FU/LV significantly improved the survival of patients with PAC compared to the conventional chemotherapies. Our findings suggest that it may be a cost-effective treatment option for gemcitabine failure despite the high cost of liposomal irinotecan, considering the poor prognosis of PAC.
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.