ArticlePloS one2026
Economic evaluation of atezolizumab in combination with bevacizumab and chemotherapy for metastatic, persistent, or recurrent cervical cancer in China: A cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFrom China's healthcare perspective, this analysis compared the cost-effectiveness of Atezolizumab in combination with Bevacizumab and chemotherapy for Metastatic, Persistent, or Recurrent Cervical Cancer.
methodsA Markov model was developed to track patients' transitions over 3-week cycles and evaluate the health and economic outcomes over a 10-year horizon for the two competing treatments. The survival data were gathered from the BEATcc trial, and cost and utility values were obtained from the published studies. Total costs, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were the model outcomes. Sensitivity analyzes were performed to examine the robustness of the model results.
resultsIn the base case, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy yielded a marginal cost of $233,602.51 and an additional 0.54 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $432,597.24 per additional QALY gained, which exceeded the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $36,859 in China. Sensitivity analyzes confirmed the robustness of the model outcomes.
conclusionsAtezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy was not a cost-effective treatment for patients with metastatic, persistent, or recurrent cervical cancer compared with bevacizumab plus chemotherapy from the perspective of the Chinese health-care system.
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.