Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33964038›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical apheresis2021

Extracorporeal photopheresis vs standard therapies for steroid-refractory chronic graft-vs-host disease: Pharmacoeconomic assessment of hospital resource use in Spain.

Blanca Boluda, Antonio Solana-Altabella, Isabel Cano, Evelyn Acuña-Cruz, Rebeca Rodríguez-Veiga, Octavio Ballesta-López, Juan Eduardo Megías-Vericat, David Martínez-Cuadrón, Ines Gómez, Pilar Solves and 10 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical apheresis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Observational
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

20 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Blanca BoludaHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1785-5561
Antonio Solana-AltabellaPharmacy Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8804-3878
Isabel CanoHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Evelyn Acuña-CruzHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Rebeca Rodríguez-VeigaHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Octavio Ballesta-LópezPharmacy Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5444-5836
Juan Eduardo Megías-VericatHematology Research Group, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0369-5341
David Martínez-CuadrónHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7540-4091
Ines GómezHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Pilar SolvesHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Ignacio LorenzoHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Jose Luis PiñanaHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Jaime SanzHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Manuel GuerreiroHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Juan Montoro GómezHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0024-8068
Alvaro Díaz-GonzálezHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Javier MarcoHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Albert BlancoHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Miguel Á SanzHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1489-1177
Pau MontesinosHaematology Department, Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3275-5593
Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe · ESInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe · ES

Funding

IIS La Fe 2019-052-1Therakos
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study assessed pharmacoeconomic costs associated with extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) compared with other available second-line therapies for chronic graft-vs-host disease (cGvHD) in a tertiary Spanish institution.

methodsPatients (≥18 years) diagnosed with steroid-refractory cGvHD were eligible. Data were collected retrospectively from index date until 1 year or relapse. Patients were distributed in two cohorts (ECP vs non-ECP), matched by age (≤ or > 40), hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HLA-identical sibling donor or other) and number of previous immunosuppressive lines (1, 2, or ≥ 3). Costs were assigned using the 2016 diagnosis-related group (DRG) system: DRG 579 (€22 383) overnight stay due to major complication (ie, sepsis, pneumonia, parenteral nutrition, or respiratory failure), and DRG 875 (€5154) if no major complication. The primary endpoint was healthcare resource utilization per patient.

resultsForty patients (n = 20 per cohort) were included. Median age was 49, and 37.5% were female. Mean total cost per patient was €25 319 (95% CI: €17 049-€33 590) across the two cohorts, with a slightly lower mean cost per ECP-treated patient (€23 120) compared with the non-ECP cohort (€27 519; P = .597). Twenty-seven inpatient hospitalizations occurred among ECP-treated patients, vs 33 in the non-ECP cohort. Day hospital and external consultations were more frequent in the ECP cohort. However, fewer inpatient admissions included DRG 579 compared with the non-ECP cohort (44% vs 58%). Inpatient length of stay was slightly shorter in the ECP cohort (30 vs 49 days; P = .298).

conclusionsECP treatment may yield economic savings in Spain through resource savings and moving costs toward outpatient care.

Indexed as

HospitalsAdultAgedChronic DiseaseEconomics, PharmaceuticalFemaleGraft vs Host DiseaseHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHospitalizationHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedOutpatientsPhotopheresisImmunosuppressive AgentsSteroidscost comparisonextracorporeal photopheresisgraft-vs-host diseasehealthcare resource utilization

Identifiers

PMID33964038
PMCPMC8453768
OpenAlexW3158278409

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.