ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2025
Aggregate Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Biologics for the Treatment of Ankylosing Spondylitis in Chile.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Methodological heterogeneity and equity challenges of distributional cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare: a systematic review from 2017 to 2025.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2026Pooled it
- Real-world comparative evaluation of quality of life and economic burden in patients with psoriatic arthritis and axial spondyloarthritis under different treatment strategies: a multicenter cross-sectional study.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveAnkylosing spondylitis is a complex rheumatic disease, characterised by chronic and progressive inflammation of the spine, causing an important health and economic burden for the person with the condition. Evidence shows the unequal impact of the disease in different groups of people, with a higher burden for lower socioeconomic groups. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of the use of biologics for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis on health inequities in Chile.
methodsWe conducted an aggregate distributional cost-effectiveness analysis. Data on health outcomes and costs were derived from a cost-effectiveness model of secukinumab, etanercept, certolizumab pegol, infliximab, adalimumab and golimumab versus treatment as usual for the treatment of ankylosing spondylitis from the Chilean healthcare system perspective. Health gains and health opportunity costs were distributed across socioeconomic subgroups. Health and equity impacts, measured using the Atkinson index, were assessed on an equity-efficiency impact plane.
resultsAll treatments had a positive impact on equity relative to treatment as usual. At an opportunity cost threshold of 1 Gross Domestic Product per capita/quality-adjusted life-year, secukinumab improved societal welfare irrespective of the Atkinson index value. When varying thresholds (2 and 3 Gross Domestic Product), all assessed technologies contributed to an increase in societal welfare, regardless of the Atkinson index.
conclusionsBiologic treatment for ankylosing spondylitis, such as secukinumab, may reduce health inequity in the Chilean population. An aggregate distributional cost-effectiveness analysis framework is feasible to implement alongside a cost-effectiveness analysis in the context of the Chilean healthcare system to provide additional information of equity impacts for health technology assessment recommendations and policy making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40329067What 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.