ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of rezvilutamide versus bicalutamide and androgen-deprivation therapy in patients with high-volume, metastatic, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: a Markov's model-based evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Rezvilutamide, an androgen-receptor inhibitor, has been approved by the Chinese National Medical Products Administration as a first-line treatment for high-volume metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC). This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of rezvilutamide plus androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) compared to bicalutamide plus ADT for the first-line treatment of high-volume mHSPC in China. Methods: A Markov model with three health states was developed to evaluate the health and economic outcomes of first-line treatment for high-volume mHSPC. Efficacy data were sourced from the CHART trial. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. To address modeling uncertainties, one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed. Results: Compared with bicalutamide plus ADT, rezvilutamide plus ADT resulted in an additional 2.16 QALYs, with an ICER of $39,122.16/QALY. At a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of three times the gross domestic product per capita in China for 2023 ($37,256.3/QALY), the probability of cost-effectiveness for rezvilutamide plus ADT was 30%. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the results were most sensitive to the cost of rezvilutamide. Scenario analysis indicated that rezvilutamide could be considered cost-effective if priced below $705.46 per cycle. Conclusion: From the perspective of Chinese payers, rezvilutamide plus ADT appears to be a less cost-effective strategy compared to bicalutamide plus ADT for the first-line treatment of high-volume mHSPC in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.