Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33677736›Full record

SynthesisThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2021

Evaluation of the cost-utility of phosphate binders as a treatment option for hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the economic evaluations.

Kamolpat Chaiyakittisopon, Oraluck Pattanaprateep, Narisa Ruenroengbun, Tunlanut Sapankaew, Atiporn Ingsathit, Gareth J Mckay, John Attia, Ammarin Thakkinstian

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cost Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drugs for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Kamolpat ChaiyakittisoponDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, 3rd Floor, Research Center Building, 270 RAMA VI Road. Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Oraluck PattanaprateepDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, 3rd Floor, Research Center Building, 270 RAMA VI Road. Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand. oraluck.pat@mahidol.ac.th.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9570-2635
Narisa RuenroengbunDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, 3rd Floor, Research Center Building, 270 RAMA VI Road. Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Tunlanut SapankaewDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, 3rd Floor, Research Center Building, 270 RAMA VI Road. Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Atiporn IngsathitDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, 3rd Floor, Research Center Building, 270 RAMA VI Road. Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Gareth J MckayCenter for Public Health, School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
John AttiaCentre for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Medicine and Public Health, Hunter Medical Research Institute, University of Newcastle, New Lambton, NSW, Australia.
Ammarin ThakkinstianDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, 3rd Floor, Research Center Building, 270 RAMA VI Road. Ratchathewi, Bangkok, 10400, Thailand.
Mahidol University · THHunter Medical Research Institute · AUQueen's University Belfast · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUncontrolled hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients commonly results in vascular calcification leading to increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Phosphate binders (PBs) are used for hyperphosphatemia and can be calcium-based (CBPBs) or non-calcium-based (NCBPBs), the latter being more expensive than CBPBs. In this study, we used meta-analysis approaches to assess the cost-utility of PBs for hyperphosphatemia in CKD patients.

methodsRelevant studies published prior to June 2019 were identified from PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry. Studies were eligible if they included CKD patients with hyperphosphatemia, compared any PBs and reported economic outcomes. Meta-analysis was applied to pool incremental net benefit (INB) across studies stratified by country income.

resultsA total of 25 studies encompassing 32 comparisons were eligible. Lanthanum carbonate, a NCBPB, was a more cost-effective option than CBPBs in high-income countries (HICs), with a pooled INB of $3984.4 (599.5-7369.4), especially in pre-dialysis patients and used as a second-line option with INBs of $4860.2 (641.5-9078.8), $4011.0 (533.7-7488.3), respectively. Sevelamer, also a NCBPB, was not more cost-effective as a first-line option compared to CBPBs with a pooled INB of $6045.8 (- 23,453.0 to 35,522.6) and $34,168.9 (- 638.0 to 68,975.7) in HICs and upper middle-income countries, respectively.

conclusionsLanthanum carbonate was significantly more cost-effective than CBPBs as a second-line option for hyperphosphatemia in pre-dialysis patients in HICs. However, the use of sevelamer is not more cost-effective as a first-line option compared to CBPBs.

Indexed as

HyperphosphatemiaRenal Insufficiency, ChronicCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansPhosphatesRenal DialysisState MedicinePhosphatesEconomic evaluationHyperphosphatemiaIncremental net benefitMeta-analysisPhosphate binders

Identifiers

PMID33677736
PMCPMC8166732
OpenAlexW3135849857

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.