ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer 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.
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.
- Tislelizumab combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin for muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A retrospective single-center cohort analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2026Article
- Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of first-line tislelizumab for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer using a comparative validation of traditional survival and machine learning models.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The RATIONALE-312 trial demonstrated that the combination of tislelizumab with chemotherapy significantly improved the survival benefits for patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). In this study, we used two models to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab in combination with chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for ES-SCLC patients from the perspective of China's healthcare system. Methods: Based on the RATIONALE-312 trial data, a Markov model and a partitioned survival (PS) model were developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for ES-SCLC. The models set a 3-week cycle length and 10-year time horizon. Cost and utility values were obtained from the drug data service platform and published studies. Primary outcomes measured in the models included total costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Furthermore, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to verify robustness of the models. Results: In the base-case analysis, the ICERs based on the Markov model and the PS models of tislelizumab group were CNY 216,041.10/QALY and CNY 206,915.66/QALY, respectively, compared with placebo group. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the most influential parameters on the ICER were the utility of progression-free survival, and the cost of etoposide. The PSA indicated that at the current willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of CNY 268,074 per QALY, the probability of tislelizumab being cost-effective in two models was 93.60 and 86.70%, respectively. Conclusion: At the current WTP threshold in China, the combination of tislelizumab and chemotherapy may be cost-effective as a first-line treatment for patients with ES-SCLC.
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.