ArticleBMC health services research2025
Cadonilimab plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in BMC health services research, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of cadonilimab plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone as first-line treatment for metastatic cervical cancer from the Chinaese medical healthcare perspective.
methodsWe developed a partitioned survival mode to simulate the costs and outcomes associated with the two treatment strategies over a lifetime horizon. Clinical data, cost resource utilization, and health-related quality of life data were obtained from the COMPASSION-16 trial and published literature. The model’s robustness was tested through sensitivity analyses.
resultsThe total cost of treatment for the cadonilimab group in this study was $86,839.48, whereas the cost for the chemotherapy group was $36,770.38. The cadonilimab group demonstrated an incremental gain of 0.70 quality-adjusted life years, resulting in an additional cost of $50,069.10. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the cadonilimab group was determined to be $71,527.28 per QALY, which surpasses the willingness to pay threshold of $40,343.68. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results were robust across varying assumptions of key parameters.
conclusionThe use of cadonilimab plus chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for metastatic cervical cancer was not a cost-effective strategy compared to chemotherapy alone 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.