4.1 Review

Cost-effectiveness of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-utility studies

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2249610

Keywords

TNF-i-a; cost-effectiveness; rheumatoid arthritis; biologics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study systematically reviewed the cost-utility evidence of TNF-a-i treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and found that TNF-a-i is not cost-effective compared to other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and conventional synthetic DMARDs for RA treatment. However, the results cannot be generalized due to high heterogeneity and low confidence in GRADE quality assessment.
Objective: To systematically review the cost-utility evidence of TNF-a-i treatment for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to estimate the pooled incremental net benefit (INBp). Methods: We selected economic evaluation studies reporting the cost-utility of TNF-a-i compared to other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) after a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Medical Centers' cost-effective analysis registry. The results were reported as pooled INB in purchasing power parity-adjusted US dollars, along with 95% confidence intervals. We used GRADE quality assessment to present summaries of evidence and random-effects meta-analysis to synthesize cost-utility of TNF-a-i. Results: We included 86 studies for systematic review, of which 27 for meta-analysis. TNF-a-i is not costeffective [$ -4,129(-6,789 to -1,469)] compared to other DMARDs but with high heterogeneity. There was no evidence of publication bias (p = 0.447). On separate analysis, TNF-a-i is not cost-effective [$ -4,805(-7,882 to -1,728)] compared to conventional synthetic DMARDs for RA treatment. GRADE assessment indicated very low confidence in pooled cost-utility results and likely presence of risk of bias on the overall ECOBIAS checklist in studies. Conclusion: Based on the available evidence during the study period, TNF-a-i is not a cost-effective option for treating RA compared to other DMARDs. However, high heterogeneity and low confidence in GRADE quality assessment preclude the results from being generalizable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available