ArticleBMJ open2022
Cost-effectiveness of recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator for acute ischaemic stroke with unknown time of onset: a Markov modelling analysis from the Chinese and US perspectives.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe effectiveness of MRI-guided intravenous recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (r-tPA) for acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) with an unknown time of onset has been demonstrated by the WAKE-UP Trial. We aim to evaluate its long-term cost-effectiveness from the perspective of Chinese and US healthcare payers.
methodsA combination of decision tree and Markov model was built to project lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) associated with intravenous r-tPA or placebo treatment. Model inputs including the transition probabilities, costs and utilities were derived from the WAKE-UP Trial, similar cost-effectiveness studies and other published sources. To compare intravenous r-tPA to placebo, we calculated incremental costs, incremental QALYs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way sensitivity, probabilistic sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate uncertainty in the results.
resultsIn China, intravenous r-tPA gained an additional lifetime QALY of 0.293 with an additional cost of the Chinese Yuan (¥) of 7871 when compared with placebo, resulting in an ICER of ¥26 870 (US$3894)/QALY. In the USA, intravenous r-tPA yielded a higher QALY (difference: 0.430) and lower cost (difference: ¥-4563) when compared with placebo. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, intravenous r-tPA had a 97.8% and 99.8% probability of being cost-effective or cost-saving in China and the USA, respectively. These findings remained robust under one-way sensitivity and subgroup analysis except for patients with a National Institute of Health Stroke Scale Score of less than 4, between 11 and 16, and over 16.
conclusionsMRI-guided intravenous r-tPA for patients with AIS with an unknown time of onset is cost-effective in China and cost-saving in the USA.
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.