ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
Cost-effectiveness of novel antiandrogens for the treatment of nmCRPC patients in the Chinese healthcare system.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. 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.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of neoadjuvant docetaxel plus androgen deprivation therapy before radical prostatectomy in high-risk localized prostate cancer.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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Novel androgen receptor inhibitors (ARIs) have been recommended for patients with high-risk nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC). Objective: The present study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of darolutamide, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and bicalutamide when combined with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for treating nmCRPC in the context of national drug price negotiations in China. Design: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods: A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of first-line therapy (darolutamide, enzalutamide, apalutamide, and bicalutamide) combined with ADT in nmCRPC patients, as well as second-line treatment options receiving chemotherapy after disease progression. The model included three health states: progression-free survival, progression survival, and death. The transfer probability per period was calculated using a Log-normal distribution. Drug costs were obtained from national price negotiations and relevant medical institutions, and health state utility values were obtained from the literature. Uncertainty was addressed through one-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity, and scenario analyses. Results: Compared with bicalutamide plus ADT, apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide provided incremental benefits of 3.52, 4.96, and 3.86 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively. This resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of $117,261, $166,618, and $238,170 in nmCRPC patients. Specifically, the ICERs of apalutamide, darolutamide, and enzalutamide were $33,357/QALY, $33,600/QALY, and $61,740/QALY, respectively. Conclusion: Compared with bicalutamide plus ADT, apalutamide plus ADT and darolutamide plus ADT are more cost-effective under the willingness-to-pay threshold of $38,223/QALY. Nonetheless, enzalutamide plus ADT is not cost-effective compared with bicalutamide plus ADT.
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.