MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409722550 · doi:10.1007/s40273-025-01488-x

Cost-Effectiveness of Adjuvant Alectinib Versus Chemotherapy for Patients with Resectable, ALK-positive Non-small Cell Lung Cancer in Canada

2025· article· en· W4409722550 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nick Jovanoski, Sarah Vaselenak, J Turki, Quincy S. Chu

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacoEconomics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaRoche (Canada)
FundersF. Hoffmann-La Roche
KeywordsAlectinibMedicineLung cancerQuality of Life ResearchOncologyChemotherapyHealth economicsAdjuvant chemotherapyInternal medicinePharmacoeconomicsCisplatinIntensive care medicinePublic healthCancerCrizotinibPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: For patients with resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), the risk of disease recurrence and progression is associated with a substantial humanistic, clinical, and economic burden. In the phase III ALINA trial (NCT03456076), adjuvant alectinib significantly improved disease-free survival (DFS) compared with chemotherapy in patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant alectinib versus chemotherapy for patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC in Canada. METHODS: A cost-utility model comprising eight health states was developed to estimate lifetime patient outcomes and costs of patients with resected, ALK-positive NSCLC treated with adjuvant alectinib versus platinum-based chemotherapy from a societal perspective. Patterns of disease recurrence and progression were based on ALINA and other trial data; model assumptions were consistent with existing models and validated through consultation with expert Canadian clinicians. Cost-effectiveness was assessed in terms of estimated effect on life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and healthcare costs. In addition, scenario and probabilistic analyses were performed to explore model uncertainty. An annual discount rate of 1.5% was applied to both costs and outcomes (evaluated for 2023). RESULTS: Compared with chemotherapy, alectinib was associated with greater total life-years (19.2 versus 13.1 years) and QALYs (15.0 versus 10.1). Alectinib was dominant over platinum-based chemotherapy as it yielded a lower lifetime cost (CA $480,967.00) versus chemotherapy (CA $592,959.00). Scenario analyses showed model robustness and consistent dominance in cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic analyses results were similar to those from the base case and scenario analyses; alectinib was dominant over chemotherapy in 93.6% of simulations of incremental costs versus incremental QALYs, and remained under a willingness-to-pay threshold of CA$50,000.00 per QALY gained in 99.7% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that adjuvant alectinib is dominant (i.e., more effective and less costly) to platinum-based chemotherapy in Canadian patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC. Together with the DFS benefit seen in ALINA, this analysis supports adjuvant alectinib as an important new treatment strategy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.681

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacoEconomicsSame topicLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsFrench-language works237,207