ArticleJornal brasileiro de nefrologia
Cost-effectiveness analysis of cinacalcet vs. paricalcitol in the treatment of hyperparathyroidism secondary to chronic kidney disease.
Article in Jornal brasileiro de nefrologia. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFor the reduction of PTH levels, two classes of drugs are available in the Brazilian market: non-selective and selective vitamin D receptor activators and calcimimetics. Among the mentioned drugs, the SUS provides oral calcitriol, paricalcitol and cinacalcet.
objectivesDevelop cost-effectiveness (CE) and budgetary impact (BI) analysis of cinacalcet versus paricalcitol for patients on dialysis with SHPT, from the perspective of SUS. METHODOLOGY: A decision tree model was constructed for CE analysis, which considered the outcome of avoided parathyroidectomy and a time horizon of 1 year. As for the BI analysis, two scenarios were considered, one of which was measured demand and other epidemiological, based on data from the Brazilian Society of Nephrology (BSN).
resultsThe CE analysis showed that the use of cinacalcet results in one-off savings of R$1,394.64 per year and an incremental effectiveness of 0.08, in relation to avoided parathyroidectomy. The incremental CE ratio (ICER) was - R$ 17,653.67 per avoided parathyroidectomy for cinacalcet, as it was more effective and cheaper compared to paricalcitol. As for the BI analysis, it was estimated that the incremental BI with the expansion of the use of cinacalcet in the SUS will be between - R$ 1,640,864.62 and R$ 166,368.50 in the first year, considering the main and the epidemiological scenarios. At the end of 5 years after the expansion of use, an BI was estimated between - R$ 10,740,743.86 and - R$ 1,191,339.37; considering the same scenarios.
conclusionCinacalcet was dominant to avoid parathyroidectomies, being cost-effective.
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.