Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy is cost-effective for first-line treatment of advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancerImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors Show Cost-Effectiveness for Lung Cancer Treatment

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that camrelizumab plus chemotherapy may be a cost-effective first-line option for advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

This network meta-analysis evaluates the cost-effectiveness of six immune checkpoint inhibitor-based first-line therapies (sugemalimab, tislelizumab, penpulimab, serplulimab, camrelizumab, and pembrolizumab) combined with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone for patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. The analysis utilized a Chinese healthcare-system perspective to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

The study found that QALYs for chemotherapy alone were 0.71, while QALYs for ICI-based regimens ranged from 1.24 to 2.07. Specifically, the ICER for camrelizumab plus chemotherapy was $13,361.50 per QALY, with a 95% probability of being cost-effective at the $27,906/QALY threshold. Other regimens showed ICERs of $13,064.23 for penpulimab, $14,022.95 for tislelizumab, and $70,913.04 for pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy.

Several limitations affect the certainty of these findings, including the reliance on indirect comparisons, chemotherapy baseline data, drug prices, survival extrapolation, and post-progression assumptions. Clinical application of these findings is limited by the fact that the results are based on economic modeling of clinical trial data rather than primary trial data. Camrelizumab plus chemotherapy may be a preferred first-line strategy depending on specific local economic thresholds and model assumptions.

How this fits prior evidence

This analysis addresses a gap in the economic evaluation of first-line treatments for squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. While previous coverage noted the use of pembrolizumab in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and the risks of serplulimab-induced pneumonitis in SCLC, this study specifically evaluates the cost-effectiveness of multiple ICIs, including serplulimab and pembrolizumab, in the context of squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Researchers conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the cost-effectiveness of six different immune checkpoint inhibitor-based treatments combined with chemotherapy. These were compared against chemotherapy alone for patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer. The study looked at quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and the cost per QALY to determine which treatments provided the best value.

The results showed that patients receiving the immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations had higher quality-adjusted life-years than those receiving chemotherapy alone. Specifically, the study calculated the cost-effectiveness for several drugs. For example, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy was found to be cost-effective in 95% of cases when measured against a specific price threshold. Other drugs, including tislelizumab and penpulimab, also showed favorable cost-effectiveness figures.

It is important to note that this study is a cost-effectiveness analysis based on existing clinical trial data, not a new clinical trial. The results depend on several factors, including drug prices and the way survival was calculated. Because the study relies on indirect comparisons, the findings should be viewed as a model of economic value rather than a direct clinical recommendation. Patients should talk to their doctors about which treatment is best for their specific health needs.

What this means for you:
Certain immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations may be more cost-effective than chemotherapy for some lung cancer patients.

Common questions

What are the different treatments being compared?

The study compared six immune checkpoint inhibitor-based therapies (sugemalimab, tislelizumab, penpulimab, serplulimab, camrelizumab, and pembrolizumab) combined with chemotherapy against chemotherapy alone for patients with advanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Which treatment was found to be the most cost-effective?

The analysis suggested that camrelizumab plus chemotherapy may be a preferred first-line strategy. It was found to be cost-effective in 95% of cases when measured against a specific price threshold of $27,906 per QALY.

Is this study a new clinical trial for these drugs?

No, this was a network meta-analysis of existing clinical trial data. It is an economic model used to determine cost-effectiveness, not a primary clinical trial. You should consult your doctor to discuss which treatment is right for your specific medical situation.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedOct 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundAdvanced squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sq-NSCLC) imposes a substantial clinical and economic burden. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (sugemalimab, tislelizumab, penpulimab, serplulimab, camrelizumab, and pembrolizumab) combined with chemotherapy improve survival, but their comparative cost-effectiveness remains uncertain.MethodsA three-state partitioned survival model with 3-week cycles and a lifetime horizon was developed from the Chinese healthcare-system perspective. Clinical efficacy was derived from six phase 3 trials and synthesized using network meta-analysis. Costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each ICI-based regimen versus chemotherapy were estimated. The willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) threshold was set at $27,906/QALY. Deterministic, probabilistic, scenario, and full incremental analyses were performed.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, chemotherapy alone yielded 0.71 QALYs at $12,227.47. All ICI-based regimens increased QALYs to between 1.24 and 2.07. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy provided the greatest health benefit, yielding 2.07 QALYs, but had an ICER of $70,913.04 per QALY versus chemotherapy alone. Penpulimab plus chemotherapy had the lowest ICER versus chemotherapy alone ($13,064.23 per QALY), followed by camrelizumab ($13,361.50/QALY), and tislelizumab plus chemotherapy ($14,022.95/QALY), all below the WTP threshold. Sugemalimab plus chemotherapy and serplulimab plus chemotherapy exceeded the threshold. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that camrelizumab plus chemotherapy had the highest probability of being cost-effective (95%) at $27,906/QALY. In the full incremental analysis, the efficiency frontier comprised chemotherapy alone, penpulimab plus chemotherapy, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy, and pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy; camrelizumab plus chemotherapy was the preferred strategy after dominated options were excluded.ConclusionAt the selected WTP threshold, camrelizumab plus chemotherapy may be the preferred first-line strategy after strictly and extendedly dominated alternatives were excluded. This finding depends on the indirect comparisons, chemotherapy baseline, drug prices, survival extrapolation, and post-progression assumptions.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.