MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200405803 · doi:10.1016/j.vhri.2021.04.007

Cost-Effectiveness of Pembrolizumab Versus Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in Patients With Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma After First-Line Treatment in China

2021· article· en· W4200405803 on OpenAlexaff
Wenxi Tang, Rongjie Shao, Jingshu Wang, Emilie Scherrer, Aixia Ma, Raquel Aguiar‐Ibáñez

Bibliographic record

VenueValue in Health Regional Issues · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsMerck Canada Inc. (Canada)
FundersMerck Sharp and Dohme
KeywordsPembrolizumabCarboplatinMedicinePaclitaxelOncologyInternal medicineFirst line treatmentChemotherapyImmunotherapyCancerCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pembrolizumab compared with standard-of-care chemotherapy (paclitaxel + carboplatin [PC]) in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma after first-line treatment from a Chinese healthcare system perspective. METHODS: We conducted a partitioned-survival model with a 1-week cycle length and a 20-year base-case time horizon. Piecewise parametric models were fitted to KEYNOTE-006 trial data to estimate progression-free survival and overall survival for pembrolizumab, and a network meta-analysis was used to estimate the clinical outcomes for standard of care. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated using EQ-5D data from KEYNOTE-006, applying Chinese-specific utility tariffs. Costs included drug acquisition, administration, adverse events, and disease management, reflecting the Chinese pricing system. Chinese-specific disease management costs were estimated based on clinical opinion on health state resource use and chemotherapy-related adverse events. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 5% annually. Multiple deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the treatment of pembrolizumab is estimated to yield 2.63 life-years (LYs) and 2.24 QALYs at an incremental cost of ¥372 316.46 versus PC. The incremental costs per LY and per QALY were ¥141 771.00 and ¥165 865.69, respectively, the latter being below a threshold of 3 times the per capita gross domestic product (¥193 932) in China, deemed as cost-effective according to the World Health Organization threshold. These findings were robust against a wide range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Pembrolizumab is projected as cost-effective compared with PC in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma after first-line treatment in China.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueValue in Health Regional IssuesSame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207