ArticleHealth economics review2013
Social costs of icatibant self-administration vs. health professional-administration in the treatment of hereditary angioedema in Spain.
Article in Health economics review, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- The 2025 WAO Guidelines for the classification, diagnosis, and treatment of hereditary angioedema, with consideration of worldwide disparities.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2026Article
- The International/Canadian hereditary angioedema guideline.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2026Review
- Update on the Use of C1-Esterase Inhibitor Replacement Therapy in the Acute and Prophylactic Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2019Review
- The International/Canadian Hereditary Angioedema Guideline.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2019Review
- Value co-creation in healthcare: evidence from innovative therapeutic alternatives for hereditary angioedema.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Hereditary Angioedema: The Economics of Treatment of an Orphan Disease.Frontiers in medicine · 2018Review
- The Humanistic, Societal, and Pharmaco-economic Burden of Angioedema.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2016Review
- Expert perspectives on hereditary angioedema: Key areas for advancements in care across the patient journey.Allergy & rhinology (Providence, R.I.) · 2016Article
- Paediatric hereditary angioedema: a survey of UK service provision and patient experience.Clinical and experimental immunology · 2014Article
- Canadian hereditary angioedema guideline.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIcatibant is the only subcutaneous treatment for acute Type I and Type II hereditary angioedema with C1-esterase inhibitor deficiency (HAE-C1-INH) licensed for self-administration in Europe.
aimTo compare the economic impact of two icatibant administration strategies: health professional-administration only (strategy 1) versus including the patient self-administration option (strategy 2).
methodsEconomic evaluation model based on the building of a decision tree. Both strategies are assumed to have equivalent effectiveness. The payer (Spanish National Health System) and the social perspectives were considered. All relevant cost-generating factors were taken into account. The time horizon was one year. Sources of information included scientific evidence, official data and experts' opinion. A deterministic sensitivity analysis was carried out to quantify the underlying uncertainty in the model.
resultsFrom the social perspective, which considers both direct (health care costs) and indirect costs (productivity losses), strategy 2 would result into average savings of €121.30 per acute attack compared to strategy 1. For Spain, this would achieve in an annual savings of €551,371. The reduction in direct costs accounts for 74% of the savings and lower indirect costs account for the remaining 26%. Savings per acute attack may range from €79.50 to €169.80; accordingly, the annual savings in Spain may vary between €90,319 and €2,315,360.
conclusionCosts related to the management of acute HAE attacks with C1 inhibitor deficiency may be substantially reduced through interventions targeting home treatment by training patients to self-administer icatibant.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.