ArticleFrontiers in immunology2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of cadonilimab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cost-effectiveness of finotonlimab plus bevacizumab versus sorafenib as first-line therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in China.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Cost-effectiveness of first-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy versus amivantamab plus lazertinib for advanced EGFR-mutant NSCLC in the US and China.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
- Cadonilimab plus chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy as first-line treatment for persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of cadonilimab plus chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of HER2-negative advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the cost-effectiveness of cadonilimab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in the first-line treatment for patients with persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer from a healthcare system perspective in China. Methods: A partitioned survival model was established to estimate the total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a 10-year time horizon. Clinical data was sourced from the COMPASSION-16 trial; direct medical costs and utilities were obtained from a public drug bidding database and published literature. The robustness of the model was assessed via scenario, one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Results: Cadonilimab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy yielded an additional cost of $31,654.02, with an additional QALY of 0.36, resulted in an ICER of $88,533.51/QALY compared with bevacizumab and chemotherapy. Utility values of progression-free survival (PFS), patient weight and price of cadonilimab were the most influential parameter on ICER. The probability of cadonilimab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy being cost-effective was 0% at the WTP threshold of $38,042.49 per QALY. When the price of cadonilimab reduced by 72%, cadonilimab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy would represent an economically viable treatment regime. Conclusion: Cadonilimab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy may not be a cost-effective option as the first-line treatment in persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer.
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.