4.1 Review

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

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2249610

关键词

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

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据