ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2020
Analysis of the Health and Budgetary Impact of Chondroitin Sulfate Prescription in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Compared to NSAIDs and COXIBs.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Chondroitin Sulphate (with or without Glucosamine) Prescription in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Compared to NSAIDs and COXIBs.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2026Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChondroitin sulfate, alone or associated with glucosamine (CS), is an effective treatment of osteoarthritis, better tolerated than non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors (COXIBs) at gastrointestinal, cardiovascular and renal levels.
objectiveTo estimate the health impact (toxicity by NSAIDs/COXIBs avoided with CS with or without glucosamine) and economic impact (savings due to avoided toxicities) of treatment of knee osteoarthritis with CS compared to NSAIDs/COXIBs, as a consequence of the avoidance of mild-moderate or severe gastrointestinal adverse effects (GIAE), ischaemic heart disease (IHD), acute kidney insufficiency (AKI) and chronic kidney failure (CKF).
methodsWe compared the current situation (available reimbursed prescription with CS) with a hypothetical situation without CS (treatment only with NSAIDs/COXIBs). The frequency of GIAE, IHD, AKI and CKF with CS and NSAIDs/COXIBs was obtained from published ad hoc studies. The cost of AE management and of the drugs (180 days of treatment) was obtained from Spanish sources. A probabilistic economic model was made for a 3-year period, both at national (NHS) and regional levels. Sensitivity analyses were performed for different durations of treatment (90 and 240 days).
resultsIn Spain, it is estimated that 519,130, 513,616 and 507,377 patients with knee osteoarthritis will be treated with NSAIDs/COXIBs and 112,775, 114,963 and 117,262 with CS in 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively. Due to better CS tolerability, 55,098 mild-moderate GIAE, 3060 severe GIAE, 204 IHD, 1089 AKI and 733 CKF would be avoided in 3 years. Discounting the cost of the drugs, the three-year savings for the NHS would be 21.8 (12.7-29.5) million euros.
conclusionDue to its better tolerability profile, CS treatment is expected to prevent thousands of AEs over the next 3 years, some of which may be life-threatening for patients, while generating considerable savings for the NHS.
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.