ArticlePloS one2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of benmelstobart and anlotinib plus chemotherapy versus standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer: Perspectives from the United States and China.
Article in PloS one, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBenmelstobart combined with anlotinib and chemotherapy has demonstrated significant clinical advantages in extending progression-free survival and overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). This is the first study to assess its cost-effectiveness from both the US payer and Chinese healthcare system perspectives.
methodA Markov state-transition model was utilized for the economic evaluation, reflecting both the perspectives of the US payer and the Chinese healthcare system. Baseline patient demographics and vital clinical data were obtained from the ETER701 trial. Costs and utilities were obtained from open-access databases and published literature. The primary outcomes evaluated were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), incremental net health benefit (INHB), and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB). The uncertainties of the model were addressed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis, one-way sensitivity analysis, and scenario analysis.
resultsIn the base-case scenario, adding benmelstobart and anlotinib to chemotherapy increased QALYs by 0.34 at an additional cost of $24,684.07, yielding an ICER of $71,559.84 per QALY. This exceeds the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $38,042.49 per QALY in China, making the treatment marginally cost-effective, with an INHB of -0.30 QALYs and an INMB of -$11,561.58. In the US, the treatment resulted in a QALY increase of 0.36, but incurred an additional cost of $151,052.04, leading to an ICER of $416,398.56 per QALY, surpassing the US WTP threshold of $150,000. 00.
conclusionThe combination of benmelstobart and anlotinib with chemotherapy is not a cost-effective first-line treatment option for ES-SCLC in either China or the US.
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.