ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2024
Cost-effectiveness analysis of Anaprazole versus Ilaprazole for the treatment of duodenal ulcers in China.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Efficacy and Safety of Ilaprazole for Acute Duodenal Ulcer: A Randomized,Double-Blind,Rabeprazole-Controlled,Multicenterand Phase3 Trial in China in China
A Phase 3,Double-blinded, Double Dummy, Positive Drug, Parallel, Randomised Controlled Multicenter Trial to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Anaprazole Compared With Rabeprazole in Patients With Duodenal Ulcers.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Anaprazole, an innovative drug, has shown promise in initial clinical trials for patients with duodenal ulcers (DU) in China. This study aimed to evaluate the potential effects, safety, and cost-effectiveness of Anaprazole compared to Ilaprazole in the treatment of DU and the budgetary impact on the healthcare system. Methods: Two multicentre, randomized controlled trials were used as data sources. The efficacy and safety of Anaprazole and Ilaprazole were compared using an anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC). A cost-utility analysis (CUA) was performed using a Markov model. A budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted to evaluate the impact on the expenditure of the Chinese healthcare system. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to test the uncertainty. Results: The study findings indicated that Anaprazole and Ilaprazole have similar efficacy and safety in treating DU (OR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.94-1.01; Conclusion: Compared with Ilaprazole, Anaprazole has similar efficacy, safety, and high cost-effectiveness, while also impacting the total expenditure of the healthcare system. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT04215653 and NCT02847455.
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.