Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34368937›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics2021

The Use of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Sickle Cell Disease: A Critical Review of the Literature.

Boshen Jiao, Anirban Basu, Joshua Roth, M Bender, Ilsa Rovira, Traci Clemons, Dalyna Quach, Scott Ramsey, Beth Devine

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Boshen JiaoThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, H-375T, Box 357630, Seattle, WA, 98195-7630, USA.
Anirban BasuThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, H-375T, Box 357630, Seattle, WA, 98195-7630, USA.
Joshua RothHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research and Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, USA.
M BenderDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Ilsa RoviraNational Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA.
Traci ClemonsThe Emmes Company, LLC, Rockville, USA.
Dalyna QuachDepartment of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Scott RamseyThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, H-375T, Box 357630, Seattle, WA, 98195-7630, USA.
Beth DevineThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics (CHOICE) Institute, University of Washington, 1959 NE Pacific Street, H-375T, Box 357630, Seattle, WA, 98195-7630, USA. bdevine@uw.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9945-6099
University of Washington · USEmmes (United States) · USFred Hutch Cancer Center · USNational Institutes of Health · USPacific Northwest Diabetes Research Institute · US

Funding

Model for Economic Analysis of Sickle cell cURE (MEASURE)OT3HL152448 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BASU, ANIRBAN · 2019 to 2019
$3.3M
The Cure Sickle Cell Initiative Economic Analysis: An Evaluation of the Costs of Sickle Cell Disease and Potential Health Plan Budget Impacts of Gene Therapy as a New Treatment OptionOT3HL151434 · NHLBI · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI RAMSEY, SCOTT D. · 2019 to 2019
$728k
NHLBI NIH HHS OT3 HL151434NHLBI NIH HHS OT3 HL152448
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel interventions for sickle cell disease (SCD) bring hope to patients, yet concern about the associated economic costs exists. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) uses standardized methods, with robust underpinnings in health economics, to estimate the value of these interventions compared with usual care. However, because of the complexity and lifetime trajectory of SCD, CEAs are challenging to conduct. The objectives of this rapid review were to summarize the main characteristics, components, and results of published CEAs of existing interventions for SCD, identify research gaps, and provide directions for future analyses. We identified records through searches of bibliographic databases, from reference lists of relevant review articles, and through consultation with experts. A total of 13 CEAs met our inclusion criteria and were qualitatively synthesized. These evaluated blood transfusions (n = 2), hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (n = 1), pharmaceuticals (n = 2), hypothetical cell or genetic therapy (n = 1), screening programs (n = 4), and interventions for SCD treatment complications (n = 3). A limited number of potential SCD and treatment complications were evaluated. No study adopted a societal perspective in the base case, six studies examined lifetime cost-effectiveness, seven studies employed a Markov or discrete-event simulation model, and eight studies used an outcome metric that captured both quality and length of life. To better compare the value of emerging and current therapies, future CEAs should adopt a societal perspective incorporating both medical and nonmedical costs, comprehensively model SCD complexity using robust health economic simulation models over the patient's entire lifespan, and capture the intervention's effect on both survival and quality of life.

Indexed as

Anemia, Sickle CellQuality of LifeCost-Benefit AnalysisHumans

Identifiers

PMID34368937
PMCPMC10697726
OpenAlexW3189829382

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.