Cost-effectiveness of first-line sintilimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for advanced esophageal carcinoma in China.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-30 DOI:10.1080/14737167.2024.2410248
Nanlong Lin, Shiting Chen, Zhiwei Zheng, Xiaobing Song
{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of first-line sintilimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for advanced esophageal carcinoma in China.","authors":"Nanlong Lin, Shiting Chen, Zhiwei Zheng, Xiaobing Song","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2024.2410248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line sintilimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from the perspective of the Chinese health service system.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A partitioned survival model was constructed to simulate quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios over a patient's lifetime based on a phase III clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sintilimab plus chemotherapy increased by 0.316 QALY and 0.285 QALY with the additional cost of $5692 and $5269, which led to the ICER of $18000/QALY and $18519/QALY gained in the overall population and the patients with CPS ≥ 10, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with chemotherapy alone, sintilimab may be a cost-effective first-line treatment choice for locally advanced or metastatic ESCC.</p>","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"205-213"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2024.2410248","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of first-line sintilimab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from the perspective of the Chinese health service system.

Methods: A partitioned survival model was constructed to simulate quality-adjusted life years and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios over a patient's lifetime based on a phase III clinical trial.

Results: Sintilimab plus chemotherapy increased by 0.316 QALY and 0.285 QALY with the additional cost of $5692 and $5269, which led to the ICER of $18000/QALY and $18519/QALY gained in the overall population and the patients with CPS ≥ 10, respectively.

Conclusions: Compared with chemotherapy alone, sintilimab may be a cost-effective first-line treatment choice for locally advanced or metastatic ESCC.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中国晚期食管癌一线辛替利单抗加化疗与化疗的成本效益对比。
背景:从中国医疗服务体系的角度评估晚期食管鳞癌(ESCC)一线辛替利单抗加化疗与化疗的成本效益:从中国医疗服务体系的角度评估一线辛替利单抗联合化疗与化疗治疗晚期食管鳞癌(ESCC)的成本效益:方法:基于一项III期临床试验,构建了一个分区生存模型,模拟患者一生中的质量调整生命年和增量成本效益比:结果:辛替利单抗加化疗分别增加了0.316 QALY和0.285 QALY,额外费用分别为5692美元和5269美元,这使得总体人群和CPS≥10的患者的ICER分别为18000美元/QALY和18519美元/QALY:与单纯化疗相比,辛替利单抗可能是治疗局部晚期或转移性 ESCC 的一种经济有效的一线治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.
期刊最新文献
Preferences of nurses in the United Kingdom for attributes of pediatric hexavalent vaccines: a discrete-choice experiment. Patient-relevance of outcome measures in breast cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional comparative analysis of patient preferences and trials conducted between 2014 and 2024. Evaluation of biological drug consumption in Italy during 2022: a comparative analysis between two healthcare facilities. Cost comparison of F(ab')2 and Fab antivenoms for pit viper envenomation in the United States: a real-world analysis. Autologous stem-cell transplantation and maintenance therapy for transplant-eligible multiple myeloma patients: cost-effectiveness analysis based on a network meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1