OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of anlotinib combined with penpulimab versus sorafenib as first- line treatment for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma （uHCC） from the perspective of China’s healthcare system. METHODS Based on data from the APOLLO study， a partitioned survival model was established with a 21-day model cycle to simulate patient survival status over 10 years under anlotinib combined with penpulimab regimen or sorafenib monotherapy. Quality-adjusted life year （QALY） was used as the core evaluation parameter to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） of different treatment regimens. Using 3 times China’s per capita gross domestic product （GDP） in 2024 （287 247 yuan/QALY） as the willingness-to-pay （WTP） threshold， cost-utility analysis was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the treatment regimens. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to validate the robustness of the baseline analysis conclusion. Scenario analysis was performed to consider the impact of anlotinib and penpulimab assistance programs on the results； the price reduction of penpulimab to ensure the cost-effectiveness of the combination regimen was examined under varying WTP thresholds （specifically， 1， 2， and 3 times China’s per capita GDP in 2024）. RESULTS The baseline analysis revealed that the ICER of anlotinib combined with penpulimab regimen relative to the sorafenib regimen was 338 611.20 yuan/QALY， which exceeded the WTP threshold set in this study. Univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that the utility value of progression free survival and penpulimab price significantly influenced the baseline analysis results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis validated the robustness of the baseline results. The results of scenario analysis indicated that when considering the assistance programs for anlotinib and penpulimab， the obtained ICER values were all below the WTP threshold set at 3 times China’s per capita GDP in 2024. When the price of penpulimab was reduced by 58%， 35%， and 13%， the ICER values were below the WTP threshold， which was 1， 2 and 3 times the per capita GDP of China in 2024， respectively. CONCLUSIONS From the perspective of China’s healthcare system， anlotinib combined with penpulimab regimen for first-line treatment of uHCC lacks cost-effectiveness compared to sorafenib regimen. However， this conclusion would be reversed if the anlotinib and penpulimab assistance programs are taken into account or if the price of penpulimab is reduced by more than 13% and above.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of amivantamab combined with lazertinib （hereinafter referred to as “AL”） regimen as first-line treatment for EGFR -mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer （NSCLC） from the perspective of China’s healthcare system. METHODS A partitioned survival model was established based on updated data from the MARIPOSA study， with a 10-year time horizon and 28-day cycles. The primary outcome index was quality adjusted life year （QALY）， and the willingness-to-pay （WTP） threshold was set at three times China’s per capita GDP in 2024 （287 247 yuan/QALY）. Cost-utility analysis was used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） of AL regimen versus osimertinib monotherapy regimen as first-line treatment for EGFR -mutated advanced NSCLC. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test model robustness. Scena rio analyses were conducted to explore the impact of utility values for different health states on the outcomes and determine the required price reductions of amivantamab and lazertinib to achieve cost-effectiveness. RESULTS Compared with the osimertinib monotherapy regimen， the ICER for the AL regimen as first-line treatment for advanced EGFR -mutated NSCLC was 2 062 096.15 yuan/QALY， significantly exceeding the WTP threshold established in this study. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the utility value of progression-free survival state and the price of amivantamab were the primary factors influencing the ICER. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that the AL regimen only became cost-effective when the WTP threshold was set at 2 050 000 yuan/QALY. Scenario analysis indicated that altering the utility value still rendered the AL regimen non-cost-effective. When amivantamab （350 mg） prices decreased by 80%， 85%， and 90% respectively， lazertinib （80 mg） prices would need to decrease by 95.97%， 40.63%， 5.29%， respectively. This would enable the AL regimen’s ICER to consistently fall within the WTP threshold established in this study. CONCLUSIONS At the WTP threshold established in this study， the AL regimen does not demonstrate cost-effectiveness for first-line treatment of advanced EGFR -mutated NSCLC compared to the osimertinib monotherapy regimen. Significant price reductions for both drugs would be required to alleviate the financial burden on patients.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of culmerciclib combined with fulvestrant as second-line treatment for patients with hormone receptor-positive（HR+）/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative （HER2–） locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer， within the context of the Chinese healthcare system. METHODS A partitioned survival model was established based on the CULMATE-1 study， with a simulation time horizon set at 15 years and a cycle length of 28 days. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） of culmerciclib combined with fulvestrant versus fulvestrant monotherapy as second-line treatment for HR+/HER2– breast cancer was calculated. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the robustness of the model. Meanwhile， scenario analysis of culmerciclib price reduction was conducted； the required price reduction and price to reach the willingness-to-pay （WTP） threshold in this study were calculated. RESULTS The results of the base-case analysis indicated that， compared with the fulvestrant monotherapy regimen， culmerciclib combined with fulvestrant yielded an additional 0.823 quality-adjusted life year （QALY）， with a corresponding ICER of 371 696.26 yuan/QALY， which exceeded the WTP threshold （199 330 yuan/QALY）. The results of the univariate sensitivity analysis indicated that the cost of culmerciclib， the discount rate， the utility values for progression disease and progression free survival status were significant factors influencing the ICER； both the univariate sensitivity analysis and the probabilistic sensitivity analysis validated the robustness of the model results. Scenario analysis indicated that when the price of culmerciclib was reduced by 30%， 55% and 85% respectively， the corresponding ICER values fell below 3， 2， and 1 times China’s per capita GDP in 2025， with the probability of cost-effectiveness being 3.00%， 94.90%， 100%. When the cost of culmerciclib （60 mg） was reduced by 52.6% to 50.96 yuan， the ICER value met the WTP threshold established in this study. CONCLUSIONS When the WTP threshold is set at twice China’s per capita GDP in 2025， second-line treatment with culmerciclib combined with fulvestrant for HR+/HER2– locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer does not exhibit cost-effectiveness advantage over fulvestrant monotherapy. Therefore， a reasonable price reduction is required to alleviate the financial burden on patients.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sacituzumab tirumotecan （ST） versus chemotherapy treatment physician’s choice （TPC） as second-line and later-line treatment for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer （mTNBC） from the perspective of China’s healthcare system. METHODS A partitioned survival model was constructed based on the OptiTROP-Breast 01 trial， with a cycle length of 4 weeks and a time horizon of 10 years， applying a 5% discount rate. Quality adjusted life year （QALY） and costs were used as outcome measures， and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） of ST versus TPC for second-line and later-line treatment of mTNBC was calculated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to validate the robustness of the base-case results. RESULTS At a willingness-to-pay threshold （WTP） of 3 times China’s 2024 per capita gross domestic product （GDP） （287 247 yuan/QALY）， patients receiving ST gained incremental utility （0.42 QALY） at a higher cost， yielding an ICER of 205 562.07 yuan/QALY， which was lower than WTP， indicating that ST was more cost-effective compared to TPC. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that key factors influencing the ICER included the utility value of progression-free survival and the price of ST. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis showed that the base-case results were robust. CONCLUSIONS From the perspective of China’s healthcare system， at a WTP of 3 times China’s per capita GDP， ST is more cost-effective than TPC as second-line and later-line treatment for mTNBC.

Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), as a treasure of the Chinese nation, plays a significant role in maintaining public health. In 2019, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China and the State Council proposed for the first time the establishment of a TCM registration and evaluation evidence system that integrates TCM theory, "personal experience" and clinical trials (referred to as the "Three-in-One" System) to promote the inheritance and innovation of TCM. Subsequently, the National Medical Products Administration issued several guiding principles to advance the improvement and implementation of this system. Owing to the complexity of its implementation, there are still differing understandings within the TCM industry regarding the positioning of the "Three-in-One" Registration and Evaluation Evidence System, as well as the connotation and value orientation of the "personal experience." To address this, Academician WANG Qi, President of the TCM Association, China International Exchange and Promotion Association for Medical and Healthcare and TCM master, led a group of academicians, TCM masters, TCM pharmacology experts and clinical TCM experts to convene a "Seminar on Promoting the Implementation of the ′Three-in-One′ Registration and Evaluation Evidence System for Chinese Medicinals." Through extensive discussions, an expert consensus was formed, clarifying the different roles of the TCM theory, "personal experience" and clinical trials within the system. It was further emphasized that the "personal experience" is the core of this system, and its data should be derived from clinical practice scenarios. In the future, the improvement of this system will require collaborative efforts across multiple fields to promote the high-quality development of the Chinese medicinal industry.

OBJECTIVE To construct ensemble learning models for predicting high-use days of budesonide based on meteorological factors， thereby providing reference for hospital pharmacy management. METHODS Meteorological data for 2024 and outpatient budesonide usage data from the jurisdiction of Sanming Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine were collected. High-use days were defined as the 75th percentile of outpatient budesonide usage， and a corresponding dataset was established. The prediction task was formulated as a classification problem， and three ensemble learning models were developed： Random Forest， Extreme Gradient Boosting （XGBoost）， and Histogram-based Gradient Boosting Classifier. Model performance was evaluated using accuracy， precision， recall， F1-score， and log-loss. Model interpretability was analyzed using Shapley Additive Explanations （SHAP）. RESULTS The Histogram-based Gradient Boosting Classifier achieved the best performance （accuracy＝0.75， F1-score＝0.48）， followed by XGBoost （accuracy＝0.74， F1-score＝0.43） and Random Forest （accuracy＝0.72， F1-score＝0.22）. SHAP results suggested that the prediction results of the last two models have the highest correction. CONCLUSIONS Ensemble learning models can effectively predict high-use days of budesonide， with the Histogram- based Gradient Boosting Classifier demonstrating the best predictive performance. Low temperature， high humidity， and low atmospheric pressure show significant positive impacts on the prediction of daily budesonide usage.

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of deucravacitinib in the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis from the perspective of the Chinese health system.Methods Based on POETYK PSO-1 study and related cost and utility data,a decision tree combined with Markov model was established.The model period was 10 years,and the output indicators of the model were cost and quality-adjusted life year(QALY).The evaluation index of the model was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER).The willingness-to-pay threshold(WTP)was 3 times of China's per capita GDP in 2023.Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the model results.Results The incremental utility and incremental cost were 0.598QALYs and 130 677.51 yuan(RMB),respectively.The ICER of the two strategies was 218 487.11 yuan(RMB)per QALY gained,which was less than 3 times GDP per capita in 2023.Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model.Conclusion Under the threshold of 3 times the GDP per capita in China,deucravacitinib is cost-effective in the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy combined with aromatase inhibitor(AI)versus AI monotherapy as first-line treatment for hormone receptor-positive(HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative(HER2-)metastatic breast cancer,thereby providing evidence-based support for clinical therapeutic decision-making and healthcare policy formulation.METHODS Based on the MECCA trial,a partitioned survival model was constructed using a 4-week cycle length to simulate outcomes over patients'lifetime.The model outputs included total costs,quality-adjusted life year(QALY),and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER).Sensitivity analyses were performed to validate the robustness of base-case results,while scenario analyses examined the cost-effectiveness of both treatment strategies under 10-year,20-year,and lifetime time horizons.RESULTS With the willingness-to-pay(WTP)threshold set at 1 times China's 2024 per capita gross domestic product(GDP)(95 749 yuan/QALY),patients receiving capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy combined with AI regimen gained incremental utility(0.66 QALYs)while incurring higher costs,with ICER of 27 684.85 yuan/QALY.Results of the one-way sensitivity analysis showed that factors with significant impacts on ICER included the cost discount rate,drug costs of the capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy combined with AI group,utility value in the progression-free survival state,follow-up costs,and treatment costs in the subsequent stable phase.Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that when the WTP threshold≥49 250 yuan/QALY,the capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy combined with AI regimen had a 100%probability of being cost-effective.Scenario analysis results demonstrated that capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy combined with AI regimen was more cost-effective than the AI alone regimen across 10-year,20-year,and lifetime study horizons.CONCLUSIONS Under the premise that the WTP threshold is set at 1 times China's per capita GDP in 2024,capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy combined with AI regimen is more cost-effective than the AI alone regimen as the first-line treatment for HR+/HER2-metastatic breast cancer.

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of inclisiran injection treatment in patients with atherosclerotic heart disease(ASCVD)in China.Methods From the perspective of China's health system,according to the Markov model,patients with ASCVD were divided into inclisilan injection group and placebo group,and both groups were treated with convention-al lipid-lowering drugs.The study period was 25 years.The rate parameters,cost parameters,and effectiveness parameters were de-rived from the ORION-18 trial and other literature.Effects were expressed as quality-adjusted life-years(QALYs).The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio(ICER)was used to evaluate the economy of inclisilan injection.One-way sensitivity analysis and probabil-ity sensitivity analysis were used to verify the reliability of the results.Results The treatment effect of the inclisilan injection group was higher(10.02 QALYs),and the cost of the placebo group was lower(255 179 yuan).The ICER of the two groups was 137 850 yuan per QALY gained,and using 257 094 yuan per capita by 2022 as the threshold,the treatment would be economically advantageous.Sensitivity analysis supported this result.Conclusion At present,the additional use of inclisilan injection can get a better treatment effect,and it has economic advantages under the threshold of three times GDP per capita in China.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-utility of benmelstobart combined with anlotinib and chemotherapy as first-line treatment for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer （ES-SCLC） from the perspective of China’s healthcare system. METHODS Based on the data from the ETER 701 study， a partitioned survival model was constructed with a cycle of 3 weeks to simulate the total cost， quality-adjusted life years （QALY）， and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio （ICER） over 10 years for patients with ES- SCLC treated with benmelstobart plus anlotinib and chemotherapy， or chemotherapy alone. One-way sensitivity analysis and probability sensitivity analysis were performed to verify the robustness of the simulation results. The willingness-to-pay （WTP） threshold was set at 3 times the per capita gross domestic product （GDP） of China in 2023， which amounted to 268 074 yuan/QALY. RESULTS Compared with chemotherapy alone， benmelstobart combined with anlotinib and chemotherapy gained 0.438 QALY more at the cost of 403 505.55 yuan more， with an ICER of 922 031.37 yuan/QALY， which was higher than the WTP threshold set in this study. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that benmelstobart’s cost and utility value of the progression-free survival state had a greater impact on the ICER value； probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model； only when the price of benmelstobart was reduced by 75.4%， the combined regimen would be cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS The first-line treatment of ES-SCLC with benmelstobart combined with anlotinib and chemotherapy is not cost-effective from the perspective of China’s healthcare system at present.