SynthesisPloS one2018
Biologicals and small molecules in psoriasis: A systematic review of economic evaluations.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Cost-Utility Analyses of Systemic Treatments for Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis in the UK: A Systematic Review of Modelling Methods.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Application of Trichoscopy and Novel Non-Invasive Imaging Techniques in the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Scalp Psoriasis.Psoriasis (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Psoriasis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
- Comparing EQ-5D-5L, PROPr, SF-6D and TTO utilities in patients with chronic skin diseases.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Multi-omics analysis reveals novel causal pathways in psoriasis pathogenesis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- A Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost Studies of the Treatment of Psoriasis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Chronic Urticaria.Dermatology and therapy · 2022Review
- Apremilast in the Treatment of Plaque Psoriasis: Differential Use in Psoriasis.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2022Review
- Calcipotriol Plus Betamethasone Dipropionate Aerosol Foam For Scalp Psoriasis.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2019Article
- Secukinumab in the treatment of psoriasis: patient selection and perspectives.Psoriasis (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Review
- Apremilast in Psoriasis and Beyond: Big Hopes on a Small Molecule.Indian dermatology online journalReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biological therapy for moderate-to-severe psoriasis is highly effective but cost-intensive. This systematic review aimed at analyzing evidence on the cost-effectiveness of biological treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis. A literature search was conducted until 30/06/2017 in PubMed, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and EconLit. The quality of identified studies was assessed with the checklist by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination guidance. Out of 482 records, 53 publications were eligible for inclusion. Half of the studies met between 20 and 25 of the quality checklist items, displaying moderate quality. Due to heterogeneity of studies, a qualitative synthesis was conducted. Cost ranges per outcome were enormous across different studies due to diversity in assumptions and model design. Pairwise comparisons of biologicals revealed conflicting results. Overall, adalimumab appeared to be most cost-effective (100% of all aggregated pairwise comparisons), followed by ustekinumab (66.7%), and infliximab (60%). However, in study conclusions most recent publications favored secukinumab and apremilast (75% and 60% of the studies investigating these medications). Accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds varied between 30,000 and 50,000 USD/Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY). Three-quarters of studies were financially supported, and in 90% of those, results were consistent with the funder's interest. Economic evaluation of biologicals is crucial for responsible allocation of health care resources. In addition to summarizing the actual evidence this review highlights gaps and needs for future research.
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.