ArticleInternational journal of immunopathology and pharmacology2017
Pharmacoeconomic evaluations in the treatment of actinic keratoses.
Article in International journal of immunopathology and pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Actinic keratoses (AKs) develop as a consequence of chronic ultraviolet (UV) exposure and exist on a continuum with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). As one of the most common conditions treated by dermatologists, AK places a significant burden on patients and the healthcare system. A range of treatments are used, including topical treatments that target the visible and subclinical lesions. The goal of such therapies is to achieve complete clearance of AKs and eliminate the risk of progression to SCC. Robust meta-analyses of trial data can provide valuable information for the optimal management of AK and cost-effectiveness evaluations of topical treatments, such as ingenol mebutate gel and diclofenac. These outcomes can facilitate prescribing physicians' decisions and shape therapeutic guidelines. Peer-reviewed meta-analysis publications and treatment guidelines favoured ingenol mebutate efficacy over diclofenac and the relative cost-effectiveness of ingenol mebutate. We discuss and critique recent evidence, from a cost-effectiveness analysis of 3% diclofenac sodium and ingenol mebutate in the treatment of AK in Italy, which has challenged this view.
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.