ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2021
Economic Evaluation of Senshio
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2021. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLocal oestrogens, the current treatment for vulvar and vaginal atrophy (VVA), are not suitable for all women. Standard of care (SoC) consists of over-the-counter lubricants and moisturisers. Senshio
objectivesThe aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of ospemifene, a selective oestrogen receptor modulator, for the treatment of moderate to severe symptomatic VVA in postmenopausal women who are not candidates for local vaginal oestrogen therapy.
methodsThe Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC) recently evaluated the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence of ospemifene plus SoC compared with SoC alone. A cost-effectiveness study, from a National Health Service (NHS) Scotland perspective over a lifetime time horizon, was submitted to the SMC. The cohort-based Markov model used robust clinical evidence from two large pivotal phase III randomised controlled studies and included four health states classified by dyspareunia symptom severity: none, mild, moderate and severe. The movement of women between health states was dependent on the effectiveness of treatment in reducing dyspareunia. Extensive sensitivity analyses were undertaken to assess the level of confidence associated with the base-case results.
resultsTreatment with ospemifene was associated with an additional cost of £847 per patient and an increase in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) of 0.06 per patient. Ospemifene had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £14,138 per QALY. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, there was a probability of 89% that ospemifene was cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. Ospemifene remained cost-effective under all scenario analyses. The SMC reviewed the clinical and economic evidence and judged that the evidence demonstrated a robust case to support prescribing ospemifene in NHS Scotland.
conclusionOspemifene is a cost-effective intervention that has recently been accepted by the SMC for the treatment of postmenopausal women with moderate to severe VVA who are not candidates for local oestrogen.
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.