Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29317954›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine research2018

A Multiple Treatment Comparison of Eleven Disease-Modifying Drugs Used for Multiple Sclerosis.

Vida Hamidi, Elisabeth Couto, Tove Ringerike, Marianne Klemp

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Patient-reported outcomes associated with transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Cladribine vs other drugs in MS: Merging randomized trial with real-life data.Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation · 2020
    Observational
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vida HamidiNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Norway.
Elisabeth CoutoNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Norway.
Tove RingerikeNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Norway.
Marianne KlempNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Norway.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NOUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral disease-modifying drug therapies are available for the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS). To ensure the most appropriate MS management, we assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the disease-modifying medicines used for MS.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review including 11 disease-modifying drugs used for treatment of adult patients diagnosed with relapsing-remitting MS. We performed a network meta-analysis using both direct and indirect evidence. We examined the endpoints, annual relapse, disability progression, mortality, serious adverse events and withdrawal from the study due to adverse events. Cost-effectiveness was assessed by developing a decision model. The model calculated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with different treatment strategies. Uncertainties in the parameter values were explored with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis and several scenario analyses.

resultsAlemtuzumab 12 mg was the most effective against annual relapse (high quality evidence). For disability progression, dimethyl fumarate 240 mg and fingolimod 0.5 mg and 1.25 mg were more effective treatment alternatives (high quality evidence). For withdrawal due to adverse events, the conclusion is unclear due to the low quality of the available evidence. Peg-interferon beta-1a was associated with more adverse events (than the other treatments). None of the examined treatments had an effect on overall mortality compared to placebo. The economic analysis indicated that alemtuzumab was more effective in terms of QALYs and less costly than the other treatment alternatives. Discarding alemtuzumab, three treatment alternatives (interferon beta-1b (Extavia), peg-interferon beta-1a and natalizumab) could be considered cost-effective depending on the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. Assuming a WTP below EUR 111,690 per QALY, interferon beta-1b (Extavia) was approximately 36% likely to be the most cost-effective treatment, followed by peg-interferon beta-1a (approximately 34% likely).

conclusionsOur results showed that alemtuzumab can be considered as more effective and less costly than the other treatment alternatives. There is a substantial potential cost saving if more patients start on the more effective and less costly treatment alternatives.

Indexed as

EconomicsMultiple sclerosisMultiple treatment comparisonPharmaceuticalRelapsing-remitting

Identifiers

PMID29317954
PMCPMC5755648
OpenAlexW2776524664

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.