ArticleScientific reports2021
Cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical cell or gene therapy cure for sickle cell disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Balancing benefits and burdens: a systematic review on ethical and social dimensions of gene and cell therapies for hereditary blood diseases.BMC medical ethics · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review on the appropriate discounting rates for the economic evaluation of gene therapies: whether a specific approach is justified to tackle the challenges?International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Sickle cell disease and thalassemia go to the PROm.Blood advances · 2025Article
- Genome editing strategies for targeted correction of β-globin mutation in sickle cell disease: From bench to bedside.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Lovotibeglogene Autotemcel (Lovo-Cel) Gene Therapy for Patients with Sickle Cell Disease and Recurrent Vaso-Occlusive Events in the United States.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- The value-based price of transformative gene therapy for sickle cell disease: a modeling analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Gene Therapy Versus Common Care for Eligible Individuals With Sickle Cell Disease in the United States : A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Annals of internal medicine · 2024Article
- Comparing super-utilizers and lower-utilizers among commercial- and Medicare-insured adults with sickle cell disease.Blood advances · 2024Article
- A scoping review exploring cure definitions and language for inherited hemoglobinopathies.Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- Approval and therapeutic value of gene therapies in the US and Europe.Gene therapy · 2023Article
- Preimplantation genetic testing for sickle cell disease: a cost-effectiveness analysis.F&S reports · 2023Article
- Distributional Cost-Effectiveness of Equity-Enhancing Gene Therapy in Sickle Cell Disease in the United States.Annals of internal medicine · 2023Article
- A landscape analysis and discussion of value of gene therapies for sickle cell disease.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2022Article
- Debating the Future of Sickle Cell Disease Curative Therapy: Haploidentical Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation vs. Gene Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Development of a conceptual model for evaluating new non-curative and curative therapies for sickle cell disease.PloS one · 2022Article
- The Use of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Sickle Cell Disease: A Critical Review of the Literature.PharmacoEconomics · 2021Review
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
Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a group of inherited genetic conditions associated with lifelong complications and increased healthcare resource utilization. Standard treatment for SCD in the US varies based on stage of the disease and observed clinical severity. In this study, we aim to evaluate the potential cost-effectiveness of a durable cell or gene therapy cure for sickle cell disease from the US healthcare sector perspective. We developed a lifetime Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical single-administration durable treatment (DT) for SCD provided at birth, relative to standard of care (SOC). We informed model inputs including direct healthcare costs, health state utility weights, transition probabilities, and mortality rates using a retrospective database analysis of commercially insured individuals and the medical literature. Our primary outcome of interest was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of DT versus SOC evaluated at a base case willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). We tested the robustness of our base case findings through scenario, deterministic sensitivity (DSA), and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA). In the base case analysis, treatment with DT was cost-effective with an ICER of $140,877/QALY relative to SOC for a hypothetical cohort involving 47% females. Both males (ICER of $135,574/QALY) and females (ICER of $146,511/QALY) were similarly cost-effective to treat. In univariate DSA the base case ICER was most sensitive to the costs of treating males, DT treatment cost, and the discount rate. In PSA, DT was cost-effective in 32.7%, 66.0%, and 92.6% of 10,000 simulations at WTP values of $100,000, $150,000, and $200,000 per QALY, respectively. A scenario analysis showed cost-effectiveness of DT is highly contingent on assumed lifetime durability of the cure. A hypothetical cell or gene therapy cure for SCD is likely to be cost-effective from the US healthcare sector perspective. Large upfront costs of a single administration cure are offset by significant downstream gains in health for patients treated early in life. We find cost-effectiveness outcomes do not vary substantially by gender; however, several model parameters including assumed durability and upfront cost of DT are likely to influence cost-effectiveness findings.
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.