ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2020
Cost-effectiveness analysis of infliximab, adalimumab, golimumab, vedolizumab and tofacitinib for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in Spain.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical outcomes of weekly adalimumab in refractory non-infectious paediatric uveitis and the role of serum drug levels and anti-adalimumab antibodies.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Etrasimod Compared With Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Patients with Moderately-to-Severely Active Ulcerative Colitis in Spain.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2026Article
- Narrative review of adalimumab for the treatment of cardiac sarcoidosis.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Review
- Cost Effectiveness of Sequencing Vedolizumab as First-Line Biologic in Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn's Disease in Canada: An Analysis Using Real-World Evidence from the EVOLVE Study.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2025Article
- Review
- How to Choose the Biologic Therapy in a Bio-naïve Patient with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Infliximab Pricing in International Economic Evaluations in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform Biologic and Biosimilar Access Policies: A Systematic Review.MDM policy & practiceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDespite the biological drugs, the treatment of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis is still a challenge, particularly in resource-limited settings. The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency of biological drugs and tofacitinib for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in the Spanish context.
methodsA Markov model was built to simulate the progression of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in a cohort of patients. The model used a time horizon of 10 years. The perspective chosen was the National Health Service, with a discount rate of 3%, and a threshold of €30,000/quality adjusted life-year (QALY). It carried out a one-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis.
resultsThe comparison of infliximab with adalimumab and golimumab estimated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €43,928.07/QALY and €31,340.69/QALY, with a difference of - 0.43 and - 0.82 QALY, respectively. Vedolizumab vs infliximab achieved an ICER of €122,890.19/QALY with a gain of 0.46 QALY. The comparison of infliximab with tofacitinib yielded an estimated ICER of €270,503.19/QALY, with a slight gain in QALY (0.16). The one-way sensitivity analysis showed a robust study.
conclusionFor a threshold of €30,000/QALY, adalimumab was the most cost-effective treatment versus infliximab for moderate to severe ulcerative colitis in Spain.
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.