Objective: The phase 2, open-label, randomized, 3-arm study (NCT03776812) found that intermittently dosed relacorilant + nab-paclitaxel improved progression-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival compared with nab-paclitaxel monotherapy with minimal additional toxicity. This study analyzed the cost-effectiveness of intermittent relacorilant + nab-paclitaxel (IN), continuous relacorilant + nab-paclitaxel (CN) and nabpaclitaxel monotherapy (N) from the payer’s perspective over a 5-year time horizon. Methods: The health outcome is expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). IN, CN and N were evaluated using QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The data for this model come from the NCT03776812 trial and other published literature. The impact of the variables is studied using a one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on a second-order Monte Carlo simulation. Results: N was the least costly strategy, at $ 4606.05, followed by IN ($22,597.75) and CN ($44,276.86). Based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY, IN was costeffective compared with N, with an ICER of $21,418.69 per QALY gained for N, whereas CN was ruled out by extended dominance (less effective, more costly), compared with N. The incremental benefits of IN compared to CN and N were 0.72 QALYs and 0.84 QALYs. Conclusion From a US health care system perspective, IN may be cost-effective compared to CN for patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, and IN is also better than CN and N in terms of efficacy. Therefore, IN is a high-quality regimen for clinicians to treat patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.