Cost-effectiveness analysis of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma
Clicks: 49
ID: 283864
2025
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
14.4
/100
49 views
14 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #266 of 309 articles by views in Frontiers in pharmacology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 309 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
BackgroundCabozantinib combined with atezolizumab has been shown to prolong progression-free survival in first-line treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the cost-effectiveness of this regimen remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab compared with sorafenib for first-line treatment of advanced HCC from the perspectives of the Chinese health system and the US payers.MethodsA partitioned survival model was constructed based on a phase III randomized clinical trial (COSMIC-312) to compare the health benefits and economic outcomes of cabozantinib plus atezolizumab versus sorafenib for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Costs and utilities were obtained from published literature. Data recorded included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), life years (LYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the results. Subgroup analyses were also performed.ResultsFrom the perspectives of the US payers and the Chinese health system, the base-case ICER values for cabozantinib plus atezolizumab compared to sorafenib were $-2,731,994.74/QALY and $-2,225,520.14/QALY, respectively. Sorafenib achieved an absolute dominance in terms of cost-effectiveness, offering greater benefits at a lower cost. The models were most sensitive to the utility values for progression-free survival and overall survival. Subgroup analyses also demonstrated that cabozantinib plus atezolizumab was unlikely to be cost-effective as a first-line treatment for advanced HCC.ConclusionCabozantinib plus atezolizumab was not a cost-effective treatment option for HCC when compared to sorafenib from both the Chinese healthcare system and the US payer perspectives.
| Reference Key |
imported_1760285542_68ebd3668fcf5
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Xia, Tong-Xia |
| Journal | Frontiers in pharmacology |
| Year | 2025 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fphar.2025.1556304
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.