SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2018
Cost-Effectiveness of Biological Asthma Treatments: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Future Economic Evaluations.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06360393 (Inhaler Adherence and Inhalation Technique Assessed by a Smart Spacer in Patients with Severe Asthma on Biologics), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 3 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.
Inhaler Adherence and Inhalation Technique Assessed by a Smart Spacer in Patients with Severe Asthma on Biologics
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic Evaluations of Digital Health Interventions for the Management of Musculoskeletal Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Development of Core Outcome Measures sets for paediatric and adult Severe Asthma (COMSA).The European respiratory journal · 2023Pooled it
- Monoclonal antibodies in type 2 asthma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Respiratory research · 2019Pooled it
- Stapokibart for moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis: a randomized phase 3 trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- Biological treatments for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.BMJ medicine · 2026Review
- Recent Developments in Monoclonal-Antibody-Based Biologic Therapy for Severe Refractory Eosinophilic Asthma.Antibodies (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Evaluating stapokibart in the treatment of seasonal allergic rhinitis.Immunotherapy · 2025Review
- Patient-centred composite scores as tools for assessment of response to biological therapy for paediatric and adult severe asthma.The European respiratory journal · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Effectiveness of SNOT 22-Based Interdose Interval Adjustment of Dupilumab for Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2024Article
- Mixed-methods evaluation of an enhanced asthma biologics clinical pathway in the West Midlands UK.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Article
- Real-world association between systemic corticosteroid exposure and complications in US patients with severe asthma.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of biologics for the treatment of chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps in Canada.Allergy, asthma, and clinical immunology : official journal of the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2023Article
- Definitions of non-response and response to biological therapy for severe asthma: a systematic review.ERJ open research · 2023Review
- Beyond direct costs: individual and societal financial burden of asthma in young adults in a Danish nationwide study.BMJ open respiratory research · 2023Article
- Roles of real-world evidence in severe asthma treatment: challenges and opportunities.ERJ open research · 2023Article
- Biological therapy management from the initial selection of biologics to switching between biologics in severe asthma.Tuberkuloz ve toraks · 2023Review
- The effectiveness and value of tezepelumab for severe asthma.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2022Article
- Characteristics of new adult users of mepolizumab with asthma in the USA.BMJ open respiratory research · 2021Observational
- Lower Use of Biologics for the Treatment of Asthma in Publicly Insured Individuals.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2021Article
- Prescriber perspectives on low-value prescribing: A qualitative study.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecently developed asthma biological therapies have been shown to provide relief for severe asthma patients not controlled by inhaled treatment. Given the relatively high costs of biological therapies, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) may be required as a prerequisite for coverage and reimbursement.
objectiveWe aimed to systematically review published literature on the economic impact of biological asthma therapies and to identify key drivers that impact cost-effectiveness in order to provide recommendations for future economic evaluations.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed and Google Scholar. We included studies that assessed the cost-effectiveness of asthma biologics and were published in English between 2000 and 2018. The Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used to evaluate quality.
resultsTwenty asthma biological CEAs were identified. Nineteen studies analyzed the cost-effectiveness of omalizumab, and one study analyzed mepolizumab. Ten studies concluded that omalizumab was cost-effective in base-case scenarios, four studies concluded omalizumab was not cost-effective, and the remaining studies concluded omalizumab or mepolizumab was cost-effective only when targeted to specific severe subgroups or given considerable price discounts. Key drivers of cost-effectiveness included day-to-day health-related quality of life (HRQoL), asthma-related mortality, acquisition price of the biological therapy, and time horizon.
conclusionsMost studies recommended carefully targeting biological therapy to specific populations such as responders or discounting acquisition price in order to further improve value. The quality of the studies was generally satisfactory, but improved evidence is needed linking HRQoL to utilities as well as understanding interventions' impact on asthma-related mortality. Key recommendations from this review may allow for greater comparability across future cost-effectiveness studies.
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.