OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ripretinib versus sunitinib as a second-line treatment option for patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors （GIST）. METHODS Based on the data of INTRIGUE study， a dynamic Markov model was constructed， with a cycle of 6 weeks； this model was used to simulate patients’ direct medical costs and quality- adjusted life years （QALYs） over 15 years. Using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） as the evaluation metric， a comparison was made between the ICER and the willingness-to-pay （WTP） threshold （3 times the per capita gross domestic product， which amounts to 268 200 yuan/QALY）. One-way sensitivity analyses and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed on the model outputs to examine the stability of the model. RESULTS The health benefits of ripretinib were lower than those of sunitinib （1.21 QALYs vs. 1.31 QALYs）. Still， the costs were higher （323 401.88 yuan vs. 227 532.40 yuan）， making it an inferior regimen. The results of the one-way sensitivity analysis suggested that the cost of ripretinib and sunitinib， and the health utility value in progression-free survival status had a greater impact on the ICER of the model. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that the results of the study were stable， and the probability of the cost-effectiveness advantage of ripretinib was always much lower than that of sunitinib with the increase of WTP threshold， and showed a decreasing trend. CONCLUSIONS In the current economic context of China， ripretinib does not have a cost-effectiveness advantage over sunitinib as a second-line treatment for advanced GIST.