Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Camrelizumab Plus Rivoceranib Versus Sorafenib as a First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Chinese Health Care System

Lang, Wenwang; Deng, Lian; Huang, Bei; Zhong, Dongmei; Zhang, Gaofeng; Lu, Meijun; Ouyang, Ming

doi:10.1007/s40261-024-01343-5

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently, there are relatively few cost-effectiveness analyses of PD-1 or PD-L1drugs in the treatment of HCC. Recently, Lang et al conducted a comprehensive analysis utilizing a Markov state-transition model to assess the cost-effectiveness of different treatment approaches for HCC ( 12 ). The study was built upon the outcomes of the Phase 3 randomized CARES-310 clinical trial, which aimed to compare the efficacy of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib with sorafenib as a first-line therapy for unresectable HCC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Zheng,

Lin,

Cai

2024

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe goal of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab and sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China.MethodsA comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken within the framework of a partitioned survival model to accurately gage the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of tislelizumab compared to sorafenib. The model incorporated relevant clinical data and all survival rates were from RATIONALE-301 trials. The stability of the partitioned survival model was assessed by performing one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses.ResultsThe total cost incurred for the tislelizumab treatment was $16181.24, whereas the sorafenib was $14306.87. The tislelizumab regimen resulted in a significant increase of 0.18 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and an extra cost of $1874.37 as compared to chemotherapy. The ICER was $10413.17 per QALY, which was found to be below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $37304.34/QALY. The results of the sensitivity analysis found that no fluctuations in any of the factors affected our results, even when these parameters fluctuated.ConclusionTislelizumab appears to be a cost-effective first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma when compared to sorafenib in China. These findings can inform decision-making processes regarding the selection of the most cost-effective treatment option for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Zheng,

Lin,

Cai

2024

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Economic evaluation of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and China

Wei,

Xu,

Lin

et al. 2024

Int J Clin Pharm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Zou,

Lai,

Chen

et al. 2025

Therap Adv Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally. Recent advancements in targeted therapies have improved outcomes for advanced HCC, yet therapeutic options remain limited. The CARES-310 trial demonstrated that camrelizumab plus rivoceranib significantly improves survival compared to sorafenib for advanced HCC. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib as a first-line treatment for unresectable HCC from the Chinese health system perspective. Design: The cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods: A partitioned survival model was constructed to estimate clinical and economic outcomes for patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC. The model included three health states: progression-free, progression disease, and death. The hypothetical cohort consisted of patients aged ⩾18 with HCC who had not received systemic therapy, reflecting the CARES-310 trial. Clinical data were derived from the CARES-310 trial and extrapolated using standard parameter distributions. Direct medical costs and utilities were sourced from the CARES-310 trial and published literature. Results: The 10-year cost of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib was higher than sorafenib (USD 28,148.01 vs USD 20,997.86). Camrelizumab plus rivoceranib yielded an additional 0.26 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with an incremental cost of USD 7150.15, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 27,633.75/QALY. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base-case results. Conclusion: Camrelizumab plus rivoceranib is likely a cost-effective first-line treatment for unresectable HCC from a Chinese health system perspective. This study highlights the need for additional real-world data to validate these findings and guide clinical decision-making for HCC.

show abstract

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Camrelizumab Plus Rivoceranib Versus Sorafenib as a First-Line Therapy for Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma in the Chinese Health Care System

Cited by 6 publications

References 35 publications

Tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Tislelizumab versus sorafenib as first-line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Economic evaluation of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the United States and China

Cost-effectiveness of camrelizumab plus rivoceranib versus sorafenib as first-line treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About