ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Economic evaluation of newly approved cetuximab biosimilars for first-line treatment of RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer in China.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
Open, Randomized, Controlled, Multicenter Phase III Study Comparing CMAB009 Plus FOLFIRI Versus FOLFIRI Alone as First-line Treatment for Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-expressing, RAS/BRAF Wild-type, Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Phase III Clinical Study Comparison of A140 and Erbitux Combined With mfolfox6 to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of First-line Treatment for Ras Wild-type mCRC
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Domestic cetuximab biosimilars have recently expanded the EGFR-targeted treatment landscape for RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in China, but their economic value remains uncertain. Methods: A three-state Markov model was developed from the Chinese healthcare system perspective to evaluate newly approved cetuximab biosimilars for first-line RAS/BRAF wild-type mCRC. Clinical inputs were derived from two phase III trials (NCT04835142 and NCT03206151), with long-term survival extrapolated from reconstructed Kaplan-Meier data. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated over a 10-year horizon using 14-day cycles, 4.5% discounting, and willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of USD 29,241.86 and USD 43,862.79/QALY. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted, and an exploratory contextual cross-trial assessment was performed. Results: Reference cetuximab plus chemotherapy yielded 1.60 QALYs at a cost of USD 246,542.51, compared with 1.53 QALYs and USD 231,648.11 for A140 plus chemotherapy, resulting in an ICER of USD 193,033.41/QALY. CMAB009 plus FOLFIRI yielded 1.83 QALYs at a cost of USD 214,917.27, compared with 1.46 QALYs and USD 148,659.96 for FOLFIRI alone, resulting in an ICER of USD 179,684.65/QALY. Both ICERs exceeded the predefined WTP thresholds. Exploratory contextual analyses suggested lower modeled costs for CMAB009 than A140, but results were sensitive to survival assumptions and should not be interpreted as formal comparative evidence. Conclusion: Under current pricing conditions, the economic value of cetuximab biosimilars varied across trial-defined comparisons and was mainly driven by drug acquisition costs.
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.