ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2025
Cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a comparative analysis in China, the United States and Europe.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anlotinib plus penpulimab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- First-line enfortumab vedotin-pembrolizumab versus nivolumab plus gemcitabine-cisplatin in metastatic urothelial cancer: a cost-effectiveness study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Cadonilimab plus chemotherapy for patients with HER2-negative advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in China and the United States: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 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 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
- Economic evaluation of anlotinib plus penpulimab vs. sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in China.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTislelizumab has emerged as a promising therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (uHCC), although its economic viability across different healthcare systems remains uncertain.
aimThis study compared the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab versus sorafenib as a first-line treatment for uHCC from the perspectives of the healthcare systems of China, the United States and Europe.
methodA partitioned survival model was developed using data from the RATIONALE-301 trial. Costs and utilities were sourced from local healthcare charges, publicly available databases, and published literature. Total costs, quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed. Price simulations were conducted to identify cost-effective pricing within established willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model.
resultsTislelizumab (priced at $1587.45/100 mg) was cost-effective in the US at a WTP threshold of $150,000, with an ICER of $108,812.52. In Europe, tislelizumab was cost-effective at a WTP threshold of $100,000, with an ICER of $94,880.40. For $186.18/100 mg in China, tislelizumab was cost-effective with an ICER of $14,206.80. Price simulation analyses showed that in the US, tislelizumab was favored when priced below $1438.30/100 mg at a $100,000 WTP threshold and below $2284.56/100 mg at a $150,000 WTP threshold. In Europe, it was favored below $1661.82/100 mg and $2501.93/100 mg for the same thresholds. In China, tislelizumab was cost-effective at a WTP threshold of $38,184 when priced below $582.11/100 mg.
conclusionTislelizumab presents a cost-effective first-line treatment option for uHCC, potentially supporting its broader adoption in health policy. Future research should focus on long-term efficacy and real-world data to further validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39585550What 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.