First-Line Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab or Everolimus versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A United States-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Ying, Zhu; Liu, Kun; Ding, Dong; Peng, Libo

doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2022.11.014

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the role of MICAL-L2 in the therapy of renal cancer is rarely investigated. Sunitinib and everolimus-based therapy is the main drug therapy approach for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and is frequently combined with other agents in clinical practice [21,34,35]. Everolimus is a derivative of rapamycin and acts similarly to rapamycin as an mTOR inhibitor.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since bioinformatics results suggested that MICAL-L2 is closely correlated with drug resistance, we sought to elucidate whether MICAL-L2 regulates sensitivity to Sunitinib and Everolimus in KIRC cells. Sunitinib and Everolimus are still recommended as standard therapy for renal cancer [21,22]. We rst investigated whether MICAL-L2 expression could be altered by drug treatment.…”

Section: Mical-l2 Regulates Malignant Behaviors and Responses To Suni...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

High MICAL-L2 promotes cancer progression and drug resistance of renal clear cell carcinoma cell via stabilization of ACTN4 and following vimentin expression

Du,

Zhao,

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Kidney clear cell carcinoma (KIRC) continues to be a substantial contributor to cancer-associated fatalities nowadays. Targeted therapies persist as the conventional method of KIRC treatment. Nevertheless, the development of resistance to those drug emerges as a significant impediment to renal cancer management. MICALL2, a member of the molecules that interact with the CasL family (MICALs), plays pivotal roles in cytoskeleton rearrangement. This study sought to elucidate the clinical relevance of MICAL-L2 in KIRC and its regulatory mechanism in cancer progression and resistance to therapy. The Cancer Genome Atlas data mining was utilized to assess the expression of MICAL-L2 in KIRC tissues. Statistical analysis of immunohistochemistry and the Kaplan–Meier Plotter database were employed to investigate the clinical significance of MICALL2. A series of in vitro experiments, encompassing assays for CCK-8, EDU staining, wound healing and transwell migration, flow cytometry, RT-PCR, co-immunoprecipitation analysis were conducted to demonstrate the effects of MICAL-L2 on the drug sensitivity of KIRC cells and to elucidate the underlying molecular mechanisms. MICAL-L2 is overexpressed in KIRC tissues. Elevated MICAL-L2 levels correlate with reduced survival rate and a diminished response to drug therapy in KIRC patients. MICAL-L2 overexpression stimulates cell proliferation, migration and renders KIRC cells insensitive to Sunitinib and Everolimus, two traditional therapeutics for KIRC. Furthermore, MICAL-L2 promotes progression and resistance to therapy in KIRC cells by interacting with its downstream regulator Alpha-actinin-4 (ACTN4) in a Rab13-dependent manner, then reducing ACTN4 degradation, and thereby leading to augmented vimentin expression in KIRC cells. These findings indicate that MICAL-L2 plays a critical role in the progression of KIRC and suggest that MICAL-L2 may function as a therapeutic target in KIRC patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mical-l2 Regulates Malignant Behaviors and Responses To Suni...mentioning

confidence: 99%

High MICAL-L2 promotes cancer progression and drug resistance of renal clear cell carcinoma cell via stabilization of ACTN4 and following vimentin expression

Du,

Zhao,

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Quality of life (QoL)‐related data were not included in the LUNAR trial, so the respective average utility values applied to PFS and PD were 0.65 and 0.43 based on prior reports 20 (Table 1 ). Average utility values were adjusted for the disutility associated with adverse events (AEs) of Grade 3 or higher impacting over 5% of participating patients 19 , 21 , 22 (Table 1 ). Costs taken into consideration for this study included costs related to treatment, laboratory testing, tumor imaging, drug administration, AE management, BSC, and terminal care (Table 2 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combination tumor‐treating fields treatment for patients with metastatic non‐small cell lung cancer: A cost‐effectiveness analysis

Liu,

Zhu,

Zhu

et al. 2024

Cancer Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTumor‐treating field (TTFields) was a novel antitumor therapy that provided significant survival for previously treated metastatic non‐small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC). The consistency of the cost of the new treatment regimen with its efficacy was the main objective of the study.MethodsThe primary parameters, derived from the Phase 3 LUNAR study, were collected to evaluate the cost and efficacy of TTFields plus standard‐of‐care (SOC) (immune checkpoint inhibitors [ICIs] and docetaxel [DTX]) or SOC in patients with mNSCLC by establishing a three‐state Markov model over a 15‐year time horizon. Primary outcome measures for this study included costs, life‐years (LYs), quality‐adjusted LYs (QALYs), and incremental cost‐effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were performed.ResultsThe total costs of TTFields plus SOC, TTFields plus ICI, and TTFields plus DTX were $319,358, $338,688, and $298,477, generating 1.23 QALYs, 1.58 QALYs, and 0.89 QALYs, respectively. The ICERs of TTFields plus SOC versus SOC, TTFields plus ICI versus ICI, and TTFields plus DTX versus DTX were $613,379/QALY, $387,542/QALY, and $1,359,559/QALY, respectively. At willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) thresholds of $150,000/QALY, the probability of combination TTFields being cost‐effective was 0%. In addition, TTFields plus SOC exhibited similar efficacy (1.12 QALYs and 1.14 QALYs) and costs ($309,822 and $312,531) in the treatment of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and non‐squamous cell carcinoma (NSCC) populations.ConclusionsIn the United States, TTFields plus SOC as second‐line treatment was not a more cost‐effective strategy for patients with mNSCLC. Of the analyzed regimens, TTFields plus ICI was associated with most significant health benefits.

show abstract

Scoping review of economic analyses of rare kidney diseases

Angell,

Wang,

Gadsden

et al. 2024

Kidney International Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

First-Line Lenvatinib Plus Pembrolizumab or Everolimus versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma: A United States-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Cited by 4 publications

References 38 publications

High MICAL-L2 promotes cancer progression and drug resistance of renal clear cell carcinoma cell via stabilization of ACTN4 and following vimentin expression

High MICAL-L2 promotes cancer progression and drug resistance of renal clear cell carcinoma cell via stabilization of ACTN4 and following vimentin expression

Combination tumor‐treating fields treatment for patients with metastatic non‐small cell lung cancer: A cost‐effectiveness analysis

Scoping review of economic analyses of rare kidney diseases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About