ArticleScientific reports2026
Tumor treating field plus chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: An international cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
The PANOVA-3 trial has demonstrated that adding tumor treating fields (TTFields) to standard chemotherapy improves survival outcomes in locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LA-PAC). However, given the high cost of such novel therapies, it is essential to evaluate their economic impact to ensure a balanced understanding of their clinical and financial value. A three-state Markov model was devised to compare the cost-effectiveness of TTFields combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone, using clinical data from the PANOVA-3 trial. Analyses were conducted from both American and Chinese healthcare payer perspectives, with willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds set at $150,000 and $40,026 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), respectively. Lifetime costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), and incremental net health benefits (INHBs) were estimated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model outcomes. The combination of TTFields and chemotherapy resulted in incremental lifetime costs of $147,766 and $39,470 and additional gains of 0.148 and 0.142 QALYs in the USA and China, respectively. This corresponds to ICERs of $1,001,995/QALY (USA) and $278,708/QALY (China), both exceeding their respective WTP thresholds. Sensitivity analyses identified TTFields device cost as the most influential parameter, confirming model stability across a range of assumptions. TTFields plus chemotherapy was not a cost-effective strategy for patients with LA-PAC at the current price, but it can be used as a clinical alternative strategy with health effects.
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.