SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2017
Pharmacoeconomic Considerations in Treating Actinic Keratosis: An Update.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-cell transcriptomic landscape of keratinocyte transformation from actinic keratosis to skin carcinoma.iScience · 2025Article
- Daylight Photodynamic Therapy for Actinic Keratosis and Field Cancerization: A Narrative Review.Cancers · 2025Review
- Safety and Efficacy of Aminolevulinic Acid 10% Topical Gel versus Aminolevulinic Acid 20% Topical Solution Followed by Blue-light Photodynamic Therapy for the Treatment of Actinic Keratosis on the Face and Scalp: A Randomized, Double-blind Study.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2019Article
- Socioeconomic impact of high-cost drugs in Brazilian dermatology. Legal and financial aspects, and impact on clinical practice.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaObservational
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Actinic keratosis is one of the most common dermatological diagnoses worldwide, especially among the elderly, fair-skinned, and immunocompromised, and is associated with a risk of transformation to skin cancer. With actinic keratosis and skin cancer prevalence increasing as the aged population expands in the US, optimizing treatment strategies may produce cost savings for the healthcare system. Since the time of our last review in 2008, investigation of the economic considerations in treating actinic keratosis has advanced. To provide an update of treatment cost effectiveness and to review factors relating to the costs of care, we conducted a systematic review of pharmacoeconomic publications since December 2008. We identified 11 pharmacoeconomic studies, with one cost-of-treatment, five cost-effectiveness, and five cost-utility analyses. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) was well tolerated and produced a favorable cosmetic outcome in most studies. Ingenol mebutate, the newest but most expensive topical field therapy, 5-fluorouracil, and PDT were the most cost-effective treatments in our review. Patient adherence to therapy and the management of adverse effects were significant contributors to treatment costs. In the US, treatment guidelines and formalized cost-effectiveness analyses for actinic keratosis are absent from the recent literature. Future pharmacoeconomic investigation will depend on up-to-date comparative efficacy data, as well as clarification of rates of, and management strategies for, adverse effects, therapeutic non-adherence, and lesion recurrence.
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.