ArticleClinical & translational immunology2026
Manufacturing cost analysis and exploratory economic evaluation of natural killer cell immunotherapy for paediatric solid tumors.
Article in Clinical & translational immunology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Natural killer (NK) cell therapy is a promising allogeneic, off-the-shelf immunotherapy for solid tumors, yet economic evidence to guide its clinical translation is absent. This study aimed to conduct a micro-costing analysis of their manufacturing and perform an exploratory economic evaluation of NK cell therapy for paediatric solid tumors from an Australian health system perspective. Methods: A micro-costing analysis was conducted using primary laboratory production data across six manufacturing steps and categories. Hospitalisation costs were estimated by expert opinion. Effectiveness estimates were drawn from chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy economic evaluations. Analyses included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), headroom analysis, net monetary benefit (NMB) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results: Manufacturing cost was AUD 58 681 (USD 38 143) per batch (AUD 9780; USD 6357 per dose). Eighty-eight per cent of costs were concentrated in three steps: NK cell expansion (50.8%), mRNA transfection (25.1%) and T-cell depletion (11.7%), with consumables/reagents comprising 85% of the total production cost. Combining manufacturing (AUD 58 681) and hospitalisation (AUD 75 000; USD 48 750) costs, the total NK cell therapy cost was AUD 133 681 (USD 86 893) per patient, yielding an illustrative ICER of AUD 35 167 (USD 22 859) per QALY gained, based on a proxy effectiveness estimate. Economic headroom was AUD 56 386 (USD 36 651) per patient. Probabilistic analysis showed 51.7% probability of cost-effectiveness at AUD 50 000/QALY, with a minimum of 2.67 QALYs required. Conclusion: NK cell therapy shows indicative early economic signals warranting further clinical and economic investigation. Micro-costing identifies actionable manufacturing cost drivers to inform process optimisation, and these exploratory estimates provide a foundation for iterative economic evaluation as clinical evidence develops.
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.