ReviewPharmacoEconomics2013
Modelling the cost effectiveness of disease-modifying treatments for multiple sclerosis: issues to consider.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of oral versus injectable disease modifying therapies in relapsing multiple sclerosis: a systematic review analysis.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Modeling Approaches in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Disease-Modifying Therapies for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis: An Updated Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Economic Evaluations.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- Disease-Modifying Therapies for Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Literature Review of Cost-Effectiveness Studies.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- Cost of Illness of Multiple Sclerosis - A Systematic Review.PloS one · 2016Pooled it
- Societal economic burden of multiple sclerosis and cost-effectiveness of disease-modifying therapies.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
- How have Economic Evaluations in Relapsing Multiple Sclerosis Evolved Over Time? A Systematic Literature Review.Neurology and therapy · 2021Review
- Predictors of Health Utility in Relapsing-Remitting and Secondary-Progressive Multiple Sclerosis: Implications for Future Economic Models of Disease-Modifying Therapies.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Article
- Overexpression of the recombinant human interferon-beta (Biotechnologia · 2021Article
- A Multiple Treatment Comparison of Eleven Disease-Modifying Drugs Used for Multiple Sclerosis.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2018Article
- New insights into the burden and costs of multiple sclerosis in Europe.Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England) · 2017Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Modeling in Multiple Sclerosis: Playing Around with Non-Healthcare Costs?PharmacoEconomics · 2015Review
- Cost-effectiveness analyses in multiple sclerosis: a review of modelling approaches.PharmacoEconomics · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Several cost-effectiveness models of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) have been developed for different populations and different countries. Vast differences in the approaches and discrepancies in the results give rise to heated discussions and limit the use of these models. Our main objective is to discuss the methodological challenges in modelling the cost effectiveness of treatments for MS. We conducted a review of published models to describe the approaches taken to date, to identify the key parameters that influence the cost effectiveness of DMTs, and to point out major areas of weakness and uncertainty. Thirty-six published models and analyses were identified. The greatest source of uncertainty is the absence of head-to-head randomized clinical trials. Modellers have used various techniques to compensate, including utilizing extension trials. The use of large observational cohorts in recent studies aids in identifying population-based, 'real-world' treatment effects. Major drivers of results include the time horizon modelled and DMT acquisition costs. Model endpoints must target either policy makers (using cost-utility analysis) or clinicians (conducting cost-effectiveness analyses). Lastly, the cost effectiveness of DMTs outside North America and Europe is currently unknown, with the lack of country-specific data as the major limiting factor. We suggest that limited data should not preclude analyses, as models may be built and updated in the future as data become available. Disclosure of modelling methods and assumptions could improve the transferability and applicability of models designed to reflect different healthcare systems.
Indexed as
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.