ReviewPharmacoEconomics2025
Examining Consistency Across NICE Single Technology Appraisals: A Review of Appraisals for Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pegcetacoplan Delivers Real-World Therapeutic Benefits and Reduces Disease Burden for Patients With Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria: A Systematic Literature Review of Pegcetacoplan Real-World Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes.European journal of haematology · 2026Pooled it
- Methodological Challenges and Preferred Approaches for the Economic Evaluation of CAR T Therapies: Evidence Review and Expert Consensus from NICE Appraisals.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Assessing cost-effectiveness in oncology treatment sequences: a review of pathway modeling methods for health technology assessment.International journal of technology assessment in health care · 2026Review
- Exploration of utilizing electronic health databases in evidence-based practice among Iranian pharmacists: a survey by simulation of health-seeking pregnant women.Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences · 2026Article
- Disease-modifying treatments in paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria: a systematic review of economic evaluations.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Review
- Reply to Comment on "Examining Consistency Across NICE Single Technology Appraisals: A Review of Appraisals for Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria".PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
- Comment on "Examining Consistency Across NICE Single Technology Appraisals: A Review of Appraisals for Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria".PharmacoEconomics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In 2024, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended two new health technologies for paroxysmal nocturnal haemoglobinuria. This review systematically compares the clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence considered within the NICE single technology appraisals of iptacopan, danicopan and pegcetacoplan, examines the consistency of the clinical evidence and economic modelling, and considers whether single technology appraisals are a suitable apparatus for consistent decision making. The studies used different follow-up lengths and used different definitions for reporting breakthrough haemolysis (BTH), but otherwise reported similar outcomes and found a significant benefit for their interventions. A lack of direct evidence and unreliable indirect comparisons meant that naïve comparisons across trials were carried into the economic modelling despite differences in their control arms. Approaches to modelling BTH and associated dose escalation differed across appraisals, despite information for pegcetacoplan coming from the same source in each appraisal, which had a large impact on the economic results. This review raises the question of whether NICE should implement multiple technology appraisals more frequently to reduce these inconsistences. Additionally, we recommend the development of a framework for revisiting positive recommendations when the implementation of health technologies deviates from assumptions made in the economic modelling to ensure cost-effective healthcare is preserved.
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.