ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2024
Economic evaluation of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and China.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review of cost-effectiveness of Chinese PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as first-line treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma.BMC health services research · 2026Pooled it
- Perioperative camrelizumab plus rivoceranib in resectable hepatocellular carcinoma: translating CARES-009 outcomes into a new therapeutic paradigm.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of socazolimab plus chemotherapy vs. standard chemotherapy for first-line treatment of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: a U.S. and China perspective.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Article
- Economic value of finotonlimab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib for first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in China and the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A cost-effectiveness analysis of a new and more effective treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma-from a Chinese perspective.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of anlotinib plus penpulimab versus sorafenib in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of benmelstobart-anlotinib-chemotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: A comparative analysis across United States and Chinese healthcare systems.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative analysis in China, the United States and Europe.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Article
- Economic evaluation of anlotinib plus penpulimab vs. sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of toripalimab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the context of regional disparities in China.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- First-Line Camrelizumab Plus Rivoceranib in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A China-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCamrelizumab combined with rivoceranib has been proven effective for treating unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC). However, their higher prices than sorafenib could impose a substantial economic burden on patients.
aimThis study aimed to evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of the combination of camrelizumab and rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for patients with uHCC from the perspective of the US and Chinese payers.
methodUsing data from the CARES-310 trial, a partitioned survival model (PSM) was developed, considering the perspectives of the US and Chinese payers. The model employed a 15-year time horizon and a biweekly cycle. Direct medical costs and utility data were collected from previous studies and open-access databases. Primary outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Price simulations, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses were conducted.
resultsThe ICER for the US and China was $122,388.62/QALY and $30,410.56/QALY, respectively, falling below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds of $150,000/QALY for the US and $35,898.87/QALY for China. Price simulations indicated the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib when the price of camrelizumab (200 mg) remained below $6275.19 in the US and $558.09 in China. The primary determinant of cost-effectiveness in both regions was the cost of camrelizumab.
conclusionThe combination of camrelizumab and rivoceranib is a cost-effective first-line therapy for uHCC in both the US and China. Lowering their prices could significantly influence their cost-effectiveness and accessibility to patients. These findings will guide clinicians in treating uHCC and help decision-makers formulate value-based drug pricing strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38814514What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.