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-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 assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of five glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists （GLP- 1RAs） in the treatment of poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus （T2DM） treated with metformin. METHODS Baseline data from patients in previously published meta-analysis and included randomized controlled trials （RCTs） were extracted to predict survival， long-term efficacy， and costs for each group using the United Kingdom prospective diabetes study outcome model 2.1. The cost-effectiveness of 5 GLP-1RAs （liraglutide， lixisenatide， exenatide， dulaglutide， and semaglutide） was analyzed by cost- utility analysis. Sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis were also performed to verify the uncertainty of basic analysis results. RESULTS A total of 21 RCTs with 6 796 patients were included. Survival analysis curves showed the superiority of semaglutide in reducing the risk of death from cardiovascular disease and dulaglutide in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality over other GLP- 1RAs. The cost-utility analysis showed that the five drugs were economically superior to inferior in the order of lixisenatide， semaglutide， exenatide， dulaglutide， and liraglutide； one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were robust. The scenario analysis results indicated that the price of semaglutide should decrease by at least 54.64% to 369.21 yuan， which is cost-effectiveness compared to lixisenatide. CONCLUSIONS For T2DM patients in China with poor glycemic control after treatment with metformin， lixisenatide and semaglutide may be considered as the preferred regimen.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma. METHODS The data of RATIONALE-305 study and related literature were used to establish a partitioned survival model from the perspective of China’s health system. The cycle was 3 weeks， the simulation time was set as 10 years， and the discount rate was 5%. The quality-adjusted life years （QALYs） were used as the health outcome indicator to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of tislelizumab combined with chemotherapy versus placebo combined with chemotherapy as first-line treatment for locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma， and one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also conducted. RESULTS The base analysis showed that the patients received more 0.268 QALYs with tislelizumab plus chemotherapy， compared with placebo plus chemotherapy， but the cost increased by 70 404.81 yuan with an incremental cost- effectiveness ratio （ICER） of 262 431.62 yuan/QALY， which was less than three times China’s gross domestic product （GDP） per capita in 2023 as the willingness-to-pay （WTP） threshold （268 074 yuan/QALY）. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the efficacy value of progress free survive and the price of tislelizumab had a greater impact on the ICER value. The results of probability sensitivity analysis showed that when the WTP threshold was 3 times China’s GDP per capita in 2023， the probability of tislelizumab being cost-effective was 53.3%. CONCLUSIONS When the WTP threshold is 3 times China’s GDP per capita in 2023， tislelizumab plus chemotherapy is cost-effective for first-line treatment of locally advanced unresectable or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma， compared with placebo plus chemotherapy.