ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of irinotecan hydrochloride liposome in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05074589 (A Randomized, Double-blind, Single-dummy, Parallel-controlled, Multicentre, Phase III Clinical Study of Irinotecan Hydrochloride Liposome in Combination With 5-FU/LV as Second-line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer After Treatment Failure With Gemcitabine-based Therapy), which is not on this 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.
A Randomized, Double-blind, Single-dummy, Parallel-controlled, Multicentre, Phase III Clinical Study of Irinotecan Hydrochloride Liposome in Combination With 5-FU/LV as Second-line Treatment for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer After Treatment Failure With Gemcitabine-based Therapy
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of irinotecan hydrochloride liposome in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) as a second-line treatment in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, from the perspective of the healthcare system in China. Methods: A partitioned survival model was developed based on data from PAN-HEROIC-1 clinical trial (NCT05074589) and relevant literature. The simulation horizon was set at 5 years, with a cycle length of 2 weeks. Costs and utility values were discounted at an annual rate of 5%. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) served as the primary outcome measure, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated to compare irinotecan hydrochloride liposome plus chemotherapy regimen (experimental group) with the 5-FU/LV regimen (control group). One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the robustness of the results. Results: The results revealed that the ICER for the experimental group compared to the control group was ¥1,271,796.38/QALY, exceeding the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of three times China's per capita gross domestic product (GDP) in 2023. One-way sensitivity analysis indicated that parameters such as utility value during progression-free survival, body surface area, the cost of irinotecan hydrochloride liposome and the utility value during disease progression significantly influenced the model outcomes. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the probability of the irinotecan hydrochloride liposome being cost-effective was 0. Conclusion: When using three times per capita GDP of China in 2023 as the WTP threshold, the irinotecan hydrochloride liposome plus chemotherapy regimen is not considered cost-effective compared to the standard 5-FU/LV regimen.
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.