This study was guided by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022) updated reporting guidelines (Supplementary Table S1) (Husereau et al., 2022 (link)). This economic evaluation was based on modelling techniques and published literature, and did not require approval of the institutional research ethics board because no real human participants or animals were involved.
A hypothetical cohort of patients, aged at least 18 years, with histologically or cytologically confirmed unresectable locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC with the same characteristics as those patients enrolled in ESCORT-first (Luo et al., 2021 (link)), CheckMate-648 (Doki et al., 2022 (link)), KEYNOTE-590 (Sun et al., 2021 (link)), ASTRUM-007 (Song et al., 2023 (link)), ORIENT-15 (Lu et al., 2022 (link)) and JUPITER-06 (Wang et al., 2022 (link)) clinical trials. Eligible patients received one of seven first-line interventions: (1) Chemotherapy (Cisplatin, 75 mg/m2, day 1 plus Paclitaxel, 175 mg/m2, day 1 or Fluorouracil, 800 mg/m2, days 1 through 5; 3-week); (2) Camrelizumab (200 mg; 3-week) plus chemotherapy; (3) Nivolumab (240 mg; 2-week) plus chemotherapy; (4) Pembrolizumab (200 mg; 3-week) plus chemotherapy; (5) Serplulimab (75 mg/kg; 2-week) plus chemotherapy; (6) Sintilimab (200 mg; 3-week) plus chemotherapy; (7) Toripalimab (240 mg; 3-week) plus chemotherapy (Supplementary). After disease progression, we assumed that the remaining patients would receive subsequent best supportive anti-cancer regimens to accurately capture the cost-effectiveness associated with first-line treatment.
Free full text: Click here