ArticleFrontiers in public health2026
Cost-effectiveness analysis based on two models of sacituzumab tirumotecan versus platinum-based chemotherapy as second-line treatment in EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. 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.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of sacituzumab tirumotecan vs. chemotherapy for patients with EGFR-TKI-resistant, EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Ivonescimab Plus Chemotherapy versus Tislelizumab Plus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Advanced Squamous Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in China Based on the HARMONi-6 Trial.Risk management and healthcare policy · 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
Background: For patients with advanced EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who progress after first-line therapy, effective subsequent options are urgently needed. From the perspective of China's healthcare system, this study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sacituzumab tirumotecan (sac-TMT) versus conventional platinum-based chemotherapy, using both a partitioned survival model (PSM) and a Markov model. Methods: Clinical efficacy and safety data were derived from the OptiTROP-Lung04 trial. Key health economic outcomes included direct medical costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Model robustness was tested via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (OWSA, PSA), plus scenario analysis. Results: In the PSM, sac-TMT incurred an incremental cost of $64,948.58 and a gain of 0.74 QALYs versus chemotherapy, yielding an ICER of $87,922.33/QALY. The Markov model showed similar trends: an incremental cost of $52,075.41 for 0.67 QALYs, with an ICER $78,131.64/QALY-both far above the willingness-to-pay threshold (3 × 2025 GDP per capita). OWSA identified key drivers (e.g., progression free survival utility, progressive disease utility, sac-TMT price, the incidence of neutropenia in the sac-TMT arm), and base-case results remained stable within reasonable ranges. Notably, PSA revealed a 0% probability of sac-TMT being cost-effective under the current threshold. Scenario analysis indicated that including sac-TMT in medical insurance or raising the payment threshold could make cost-effectiveness feasible (up to 100% probability). Conclusion: In China's healthcare setting, sac-TMT is not cost-effective for second line treatment of advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC compared with platinum-based chemotherapy. To improve patient access, substantial price reductions or inclusion in the National Reimbursement Drug List are necessary. These findings may inform both clinical decisions and health resource allocation.
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.