ArticlePloS one2025
Cost-effectiveness analysis of two inhaled antibiotics for stable Bronchiectasis with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in China.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two available options for inhaled antibiotic treatment for patients with Bronchiectasis (BE) with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) infections from the perspective of China's healthcare system.
methodsA four-state Markov model was developed over a one-year horizon to simulate the cost-effectiveness of two inhaled antibiotic strategies: Tobramycin inhalation solution (TIS) versus nebulized colistimethate sodium (CMS). The inputs for the model were derived from phase III clinical trials and published literature, with cost data were sourced from public and real-world databases, etc. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was assessed, setting the willingness-to-pay threshold at one times the per capita GDP of China. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the impact of uncertainties in input parameters.
resultsOver a one-year period, TIS was found to dominate CMS, resulting in a cost saving of CNY 41,109.53 (USD 5,689.27) and an increase of 0.0048 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these findings, which remained consistent under various scenarios.
conclusionsTIS reduces healthcare costs and improves clinical outcomes compared to CMS in managing BE with PA infections in China. This study supports the inclusion of TIS in clinical guidelines for managing BE with PA infections, considering both economic benefits and health outcomes.
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.