ArticleScientific reports2025
Modeling brain metastases in cost effectiveness analysis of atezolizumab for extensive stage small cell lung cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Battle against time for innovative cancer treatment: an updated cost-effectiveness analysis of pemigatinib in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab as the second-line treatment for advanced endometrial carcinoma.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- A comparative review of economic evaluations for immune checkpoint inhibitors in early stage and advanced stage cancer: focusing on pembrolizumab.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain metastases (BM) significantly impact prognosis and healthcare utilization but remain underrepresented in economic evaluations. The IMpower133 trial demonstrated the efficacy of atezolizumab plus chemotherapy (carboplatin and etoposide), particularly among patients without baseline BM, leading to its approval for extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (EX-SCLC) in several countries. As previous studies did not incorporate BM status, we addressed this gap by including BM in the cost-effectiveness analysis of atezolizumab for EX-SCLC. A four-state Markov model was constructed with the following health states: progression-free, progressive disease (PD) without brain metastases, PD with brain metastases, and death, over a 15-year time horizon. Time-varying efficacy and utility were derived from IMpower133; direct medical costs were estimated using population-based databases. Both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess uncertainty in input parameters. Adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy increased QALYs by 0.721 at an incremental cost of NT$2,111,359, yielding an incremental net monetary benefit of NT$68,264, and a 53.22% probability of cost-effectiveness. Key sources of uncertainty include efficacy, cost of atezolizumab, time horizon, and utility. In conclusion, adding atezolizumab to chemotherapy is cost-effective for patients with EX-SCLC without baseline BM. Incorporating BM status into CEA could support more nuanced policy recommendations.
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.