Skip to main content
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Open access
Research Article
20 May 2026

Economic evaluation of stapokibart for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in China: a cost–effectiveness analysis

Authors: Jingran Yang https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9283-4863, Lei Ren, Fengyuan Xie https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8905-4567, Rong Shao [email protected], and Rong Jiang https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1722-9536 [email protected]Author Info & Affiliations
Volume 15, Number 6
PDFFormats

Abstract

Aim: To evaluate the cost–effectiveness of stapokibart compared with dupilumab in treating chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) from the healthcare system perspective in China. The focus is on assessing the economic viability of biologic treatments in managing CRSwNP, particularly when conventional treatments and/or surgery fail to provide sufficient relief. Materials & methods: A decision tree Markov model was developed to assess the cost–effectiveness of stapokibart and dupilumab. Clinical data from multiple trials were used, and a matching-adjusted indirect comparison was conducted to account for differences in patient populations across studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the model results under varying assumptions. Results: The study results indicate that stapokibart offers a clear economic advantage over dupilumab. It both lowers treatment costs and enhances patients' quality of life. Sensitivity analysis shows that stapokibart remains cost-effective at the threshold of one to three-times China’s per capita GDP, demonstrating strong economic viability in the Chinese healthcare context. Conclusion: The study demonstrates that stapokibart is a cost-effective treatment option for CRSwNP compared with dupilumab. It offers significant improvements in patient outcomes and is economically viable under the prevailing healthcare budget in China, providing valuable insights for policy-makers and healthcare providers.

Plain language summary: Comparing the economic value of stapokibart & dupilumab for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in China

What is this article about?

In China, stapokibart and dupilumab are biologic treatments for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps, a long-term condition that can seriously affect how people feel and live. For some patients, standard medicines or surgery do not provide enough relief, and biologic treatments may then be considered. However, these treatments are expensive, so it is important to understand which option provides better value.
To assess the economic value of stapokibart compared with dupilumab, this study evaluated the costs and health outcomes of the two treatments from the healthcare system perspective in China. Because there was no direct clinical trial comparing stapokibart with dupilumab, data from separate clinical studies were used and adjusted to make the comparison as fair as possible.

What were the results?

The results showed that stapokibart was associated with lower overall treatment costs and better health outcomes than dupilumab in the main analysis. Additional analyses also showed that the findings remained stable under different assumptions. When the price difference between the two drugs was removed, stapokibart was no longer cost-saving, but it still remained cost-effective.

What do the results mean?

These findings suggest that stapokibart may offer an economic advantage over dupilumab for patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in China. The results may help support treatment selection and medical insurance decision-making in clinical practice.

Formats available

You can view the full content in the following formats:

View PDFView Full Text

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest
1.
Editorial Board of Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, Rhinology Group of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Jiang Y et al. China guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis (2024). Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 60(3), 221–249 (2025).
PubMed
Google Scholar
2.
Li D. Clinical Study on the Improvement of Olfactory Dysfunction in Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis without Nasal Polyps Using Nasal Three-Injection Therapy [Dissertation]. Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China (2023).
Google Scholar
3.
Bachert C, Bhattacharyya N, Desrosiers M, Khan AH. Burden of disease in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. J. Asthma Allergy. 14, 127–134 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
4.
Bhattacharyya N, Villeneuve S, Joish VN et al. Cost burden and resource utilization in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps. Laryngoscope 129(9), 1969–1975 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
5.
Chen S, Zhou A, Emmanuel B, Garcia D, Rosta E. Systematic literature review of humanistic and economic burdens of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 36(11), 1913–1926 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
6.
Liu YB, Liu YC, Sun AX et al. Current status of symptom distress in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps and its relationship with negative emotions and quality of life. Dang Dai Hu Shi 31(8), 117–121 (2024).
Google Scholar
7.
Yong M, Kirubalingam K, Desrosiers MY, Kilty SJ, Thamboo A. Cost-effectiveness analysis of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in Canada. Allergy Asthma Clin. Immunol. 19(1), 90 (2023).
PubMed
Google Scholar
8.
Yong M, Wu YQ, Howlett J, Ballreich J, Walgama E, Thamboo A. Cost-effectiveness analysis comparing dupilumab and aspirin desensitization therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis in aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. Int. Forum Allergy Rhinol. 11(12), 1626–1636 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
9.
De Corso E, Furneri G, Salsi D et al. Cost-utility analysis of dupilumab for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP) in Italy. J Pers Med. 12(6), 951 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• Methodological reference for cost–utility analysis of biologic therapies in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (CRSwNP).
10.
Scangas GA, Wu AW, Ting JY et al. Cost utility analysis of dupilumab versus endoscopic sinus surgery for chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. Laryngoscope 131(1), E26–E33 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
11.
Shen S, Yan B, Wang M et al. Stapokibart for severe uncontrolled chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps: the CROWNS-2 Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 334(11), 962–972 (2025).
PubMed
Google Scholar
•• Key clinical data source for the efficacy and safety of stapokibart in severe uncontrolled CRSwNP.
12.
Bachert C, Han JK, Desrosiers M et al. Efficacy and safety of dupilumab in patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (LIBERTY NP SINUS-24 and LIBERTY NP SINUS-52): results from two multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group Phase III trials. Lancet 394(10209), 1638–1650 (2019).
Google Scholar
•• Key clinical data source for the efficacy and safety of stapokibart in severe uncontrolled CRSwNP.
13.
Hong HY, Zhang Y, Wang TC et al. Chinese expert consensus on the use of biologics in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis. ORL J. Otorhinolaryngol. Relat. Spec. 85(3), 128–140 (2023).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• Chinese expert consensus on the use of biologics in patients with chronic rhinosinusitis.
14.
National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. Statistical bulletin on the development of China's health undertaking in 2023. National Health Commission website. (2024). (Accessed: 10 July 2025). https://file.m12333.cn/upfile/download/bf66337f-795a-c925-d6fc-efa4f99495c8.pdf
Google Scholar
15.
Zhao Q, Yu L, Jin P et al. A comprehensive investigation of the demographics, treatments, comorbidities, and disease burden of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis patients: a descriptive analysis. Ann. Transl. Med. 10(3), 150 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
16.
Liu YX, Wang RT, Li GW. Application of matching-adjusted indirect comparison in medical research. Chin. J. Evid. Based Med. 22(10), 1201–1205 (2022).
Google Scholar
17.
Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Griffith LE, Walter SD. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J. Clin. Epidemiol. (6), –691 (1997).
PubMed
Google Scholar
18.
World Health Organization. Life tables by country: China. Global Health Observatory data repository. (2025). (Accessed: 10 July 2025). https://apps.who.int/gho/data/view.main.60340?lang=en
Google Scholar
19.
Gong Y, Lin C, Jin Y et al. The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of umeclidinium/vilanterol versus tiotropium in symptomatic patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Can. Respir. J. 2022, 2878648 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
20.
Lin YT, Wang C, He XY et al. Comparative cost-effectiveness of first-line pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy alone in persistent, recurrent, or metastatic cervical cancer. Front. Immunol. 14, 1345942 (2024).
PubMed
Google Scholar
21.
China guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluations (2020 edition). China Medical Science Press, Beijing, China (2020).
Google Scholar
•• Core methodological guidance for pharmacoeconomic evaluation in China.
22.
National Bureau of Statistics of China. National data. National Bureau of Statistics of China website. (2025). (Accessed: 10 July 2025). http://data.stats.gov.cn/
Google Scholar
23.
Cai D, Shi S, Jiang S et al. Estimation of the cost-effective threshold of a quality-adjusted life year in China based on the value of statistical life. Eur. J. Health Econ. 23(4), 607–615 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
24.
Bachert C, Bhattacharyya N, Desrosiers M et al. Burden of disease in chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps. J. Asthma Allergy 14, 127–134 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
25.
Peters AT, Bengtson LGS, Chung Y et al. Clinical and economic burden of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyposis: a US administrative claims analysis. Allergy Asthma Proc. 43(5), 435–445 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
|