SynthesisPloS one2015
The cost-effectiveness of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 5 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
51 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 121 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers and facilitators to yoga practice among people living with arthritis: a qualitative systematic review.Rheumatology international · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs on major cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Scientific reports · 2021Pooled it
- Biologics and Targeted Synthetic Drugs Can Induce Immune-Mediated Glomerular Disorders in Patients with Rheumatic Diseases: An Updated Systematic Literature Review.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2021Pooled it
- The Use of Decision-Analytic Models in Atopic Eczema: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Pooled it
- EQ-5D studies in musculoskeletal and connective tissue diseases in eight Central and Eastern European countries: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.Rheumatology international · 2017Pooled it
- Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy for a Degenerative Meniscus Tear Is Not Cost Effective Compared With Placebo Surgery: An Economic Evaluation Based on the FIDELITY Trial Data.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2024Trial
- Economic evaluation of an extended nutritional intervention in older Australian hospitalized patients: a randomized controlled trial.BMC geriatrics · 2018Trial
- Optimizing treatment with tumour necrosis factor inhibitors in rheumatoid arthritis-a proof of principle and exploratory trial: is dose tapering practical in good responders?Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2017Trial
- Ultra-low dose of rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.Trials · 2017Trial
- Rheumatoid arthritis burden in 129 low- and middle-income countries from 1990 to 2023.iScience · 2026Article
- Frontiers in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Emerging Research and Unmet Needs in Pharmacologic Management.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Gut microbiota in chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder: shared mechanisms, disease-specific signatures, and therapeutic prospects.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
- Key Features of Effective Yoga Interventions in Addition to Standard Medical Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.ACR open rheumatology · 2025Review
- Gastroesophageal reflux disease increases the risk of rheumatoid arthritis: a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cost-consequence analysis of tocilizumab versus adalimumab and etanercept among rheumatoid arthritis patients in Saudi Arabia: a single-center study.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2024Article
- Fostering healthcare system sustainability through efficient practices: Can adopting biosimilars ease the financial burden of rheumatoid arthritis?F1000Research · 2024Review
- Melittin as a therapeutic agent for rheumatoid arthritis: mechanistic insights, advanced delivery systems, and future perspectives.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Article
- Impact of concomitant methotrexate on disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis tapering abatacept: results from KOBIO registry.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- ERK1-mediated immunomodulation of mesenchymal stem cells ameliorates inflammatory disorders.iScience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesEconomic evaluations provide information to aid the optimal utilization of limited healthcare resources. Costs of biologics for Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are remarkably high, which makes these agents an important target for economic evaluations. This systematic review aims to identify existing studies examining the cost-effectiveness of biologics for RA, assess their quality and report their results systematically.
methodsA literature search covering Medline, Scopus, Cochrane library, ACP Journal club and Web of Science was performed in March 2013. The cost-utility analyses (CUAs) of one or more available biological drugs for the treatment of RA in adults were included. Two independent investigators systematically collected information and assessed the quality of the studies. To enable the comparison of the results, all costs were converted to 2013 euro.
resultsOf the 4890 references found in the literature search, 41 CUAs were included in the current systematic review. While considering only direct costs, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) ranged from 39,000 to 1,273,000 €/quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained in comparison to conventional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (cDMARDs) in cDMARD naïve patients. Among patients with an insufficient response to cDMARDs, biologics were associated with ICERs ranging from 12,000 to 708,000 €/QALY. Rituximab was found to be the most cost-effective alternative compared to other biologics among the patients with an insufficient response to TNFi.
conclusionsWhen 35,000 €/QALY is considered as a threshold for the ICER, TNFis do not seem to be cost-effective among cDMARD naïve patients and patients with an insufficient response to cDMARDs. With thresholds of 50,000 to 100,000 €/QALY biologics might be cost-effective among patients with an inadequate response to cDMARDs. Standardization of multiattribute utility instruments and a validated standard conversion method for missing utility measures would enable better comparison between CUAs.
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.