ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2025
Cost-Minimization Analysis and Budget Impact Analysis About Subcutaneous Natalizumab in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in Italy.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 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.
- Multi-Indication Budget Impact Analysis of Subcutaneous IgPro20 Pre-filled Syringes for the Treatment of Primary Immunodeficiency Syndromes, Secondary Immunodeficiencies, and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy in Italy.Advances in therapy · 2026Article
- Subcutaneous natalizumab administration in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: results of EASIER 2 study.Journal of neurology · 2026Observational
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
Purpose: Two analyses, a cost-minimization and a budget impact, were conducted to estimate the economic and financial impact of subcutaneous (SC) vs intravenous (IV) natalizumab in terms of administration times and costs in the Italian setting from the perspective of multiple sclerosis (MS) center, patient, and society. Patients and Methods: Cost minimization analysis (CMA) adopted a Markov model with three different states, and it is based on the results of REFINE study and its post-hoc analysis, which evaluated and demonstrated the non-inferiority of natalizumab SC vs IV formulation. The economic inputs came mainly from EASIER study, that estimated the administration time, resource consumption, and costs of natalizumab SC vs IV. A lifetime horizon was considered. Budget impact analysis (BIA) was conducted with a cost calculator approach and compared a base scenario (without SC natalizumab) with an alternative scenario (with SC natalizumab). The inputs were shared with the CMA and a 3-year time horizon was considered. A progressive increase in the number of patients treated with natalizumab SC was estimated from the 1st to the 2nd to the 3rd year after reimbursement in Italy. Results: CMA estimated that savings due to the use of SC instead of IV natalizumab would be €2,824, €1,137, and €9,170 per patient from the perspectives of MS center, patient, and society, respectively, thus depicting a weak dominance (lower costs and non-inferiority efficacy). BIA estimated that the savings were approximately 3.2 million euros from the perspective of MS centers and around 10.3 million euros from the perspective of society in the first 3 years following reimbursement. Conclusion: Administering natalizumab subcutaneously rather than intravenously to treatment-eligible patients would result in administration time and cost savings thus determining a favorable impact for the MS center, the patient and the society.
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.