OBJECTIVES: There are relatively few treatment options for pre-treated metastatic melanoma (MM) patients.  Clinicians have recently been provided access to a new option, ipilumumab that has demonstrated long-term survival benefits, in a subset of patients.  Karweit J and colleagues (2012) present data to support the use of mean OS for agents with a right-skewed survival curve, where a subset of patients respond to treatment with long term survival -as is the case for ipilimumab. The research presents data for several oncology agents: ipilimumab for MM, bevacizumab for non-small cell lung cancer, sorafenib for hepatocellular carcinoma, lenalidomide for multiple myeloma, trastuzumab for metastatic breast cancer and vemurafenib for MM.  The data reveals a greater mean OS improvement than median OS improvement, since mean OS accurately captures the complete survival benefits.   In this analysis we select agents from the Krweit J et al study and who have received regulatory authorization in Colombia, to compare their relative economic value. METHODS: The economic value of each asset is presented in terms of cost per month of mean OS within the Colombian healthcare payer perspective.  The analysis uses the cost to treat to mean progression of each asset divided by the months of mean overall survival improvement using current list prices of assets.  RESULTS: Ipilimumab in comparison to bevacizumab, sorafenib, trastuzumab, sutinib, lenalidomide, and vemurafenib demonstrates a clinical and economic relative value.  The cost per mean overall survival month gained for ipilumumab ($39,344,362 COP) is below the average of the comparator assets (range from $60,226,690 to $20,166,226). CONCLUSIONS: The relative clinical and economic value of ipilumumab in the context of a variety of oncologic assets is clearly documented.  This data provides health care decision makers critical data when determining coverage of oncologic treatments.