ArticleInternational journal of hematology2025
Cost-effectiveness of ferric citrate hydrate in patients with iron deficiency anemia.
Article in International journal of hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Iron Therapy in Pediatric Iron Deficiency and Iron-Deficiency Anemia: Efficacy, Safety, and Formulation-Specific Trade-Offs-A Narrative Review.Hematology reports · 2026Review
- A Prospective Clinical Study of Ferric Citrate Hydrate for Chronic Heart Failure with Iron Deficiency Anemia.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the cost-effectiveness of treating iron deficiency anemia (IDA) with ferric citrate hydrate (FC) in Japan. We employed four treatment strategies: switching from sodium ferrous citrate (SF) to FC at (1) 500 mg (approximately 120 mg of iron) per day or (2) 1000 mg (approximately 240 mg of iron) per day in patients with SF-induced nausea/vomiting, or starting treatment with FC at (3) 500 mg/day or (4) 1000 mg/day. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of these strategies compared with SF 100 mg (100 mg of iron) per day. Incremental effects over 26 weeks relative to SF 100 mg were 0.0052 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for (1) and (2), and 0.0044 QALYs for (3) and (4). From the payer's perspective, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs: JPY/QALY) against SF 100 mg were: (1) 1,107,780, (2) 2,257,477, (3) 5,588,430, and (4) 11,544,816. All four FC strategies were dominant (less costly and more effective) from a limited societal perspective. Treatment with FC for IDA was cost-effective (ICER ≤ JPY 5,000,000/QALY) when switching strategies from the payer perspective, and cost-saving (all FC strategies) from limited societal perspectives. Individual patients' characteristics and cost-effectiveness should be considered in treatment selection.
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.