Cost-effectiveness analysis of tepotinib vs capmatinib as subsequent therapy in MET exon 14-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer.
OpenAlex 토픽 ·
Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
Melanoma and MAPK Pathways
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
[BACKGROUND] This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Tepotinib versus Capmatinib in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations i
APA
Mengmeng Liu, Lu Zhong, Tong Liu (2026). Cost-effectiveness analysis of tepotinib vs capmatinib as subsequent therapy in MET exon 14-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer.. Lung cancer management, 15(1), 2654888. https://doi.org/10.1080/17581966.2026.2654888
MLA
Mengmeng Liu, et al.. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of tepotinib vs capmatinib as subsequent therapy in MET exon 14-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer.." Lung cancer management, vol. 15, no. 1, 2026, pp. 2654888.
PMID
41934258
Abstract
[BACKGROUND] This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Tepotinib versus Capmatinib in patients with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with MET Exon 14 Skipping Mutations in China.
[METHODS] An economic evaluation using a 3-state partitioned survival model assessed the cost-effectiveness of Tepotinib versus Capmatinib. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from two clinical trials were digitally extracted. The Exponential model with matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was employed at the end of the trials to extrapolate the long-term survivals.
[RESULTS] The estimated cost and utility of Tepotinib treatment were higher than those of Capmatinib treatment, respectively (95,392.54 USD vs. 51,003.63 USD; 2.11 QALYs vs 1.38 QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Capmatinib treatment vs. Tepotinib treatment was calculated at 60,977.28 USD/QALY.
[CONCLUSIONS] Tepotinib was not cost-effective compared to Capmatinib as the second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients with MET exon 14 skipping mutations in China.
[METHODS] An economic evaluation using a 3-state partitioned survival model assessed the cost-effectiveness of Tepotinib versus Capmatinib. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from two clinical trials were digitally extracted. The Exponential model with matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) was employed at the end of the trials to extrapolate the long-term survivals.
[RESULTS] The estimated cost and utility of Tepotinib treatment were higher than those of Capmatinib treatment, respectively (95,392.54 USD vs. 51,003.63 USD; 2.11 QALYs vs 1.38 QALYs). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of Capmatinib treatment vs. Tepotinib treatment was calculated at 60,977.28 USD/QALY.
[CONCLUSIONS] Tepotinib was not cost-effective compared to Capmatinib as the second-line treatment for advanced or metastatic NSCLC patients with MET exon 14 skipping mutations in China.
같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)
- CDH17 facilitates β-catenin nuclear translocation to reduce drug sensitivity in cisplatin-resistant gastric cancer cells.
- Metabolic engineering of SLC38A2 reprograms glutamine utilization and enhances CAR-macrophage antitumor function in solid tumors.
- Triangulating Associations Between Fruit Intake and Lung Cancer Risk: Evidence from GBD Estimates, Mendelian Randomization, and Real-World Validation.
- Cell-free supernatant of Clostridium butyricum induces mitochondrial apoptosis and suppresses NF-κB pathway in colorectal cancer cells.
- Case Report: Olaparib combined with temozolomide and atezolizumab in a case of -mutated small-cell transformation of lung adenocarcinoma.