ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Cost-effectiveness of edaravone dexborneol sublingual tablet versus concentrated solution for injection for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in China.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Edaravone dexborneol sublingual tablet (EDSL) is a novel therapy for acute ischemic stroke (AIS), proven effective and safe. Its convenient dosage form also provides an alternative administration option, helping to enhance treatment accessibility. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of EDSL versus edaravone dexborneol concentrated solution for injection (EDCSI) from the Chinese healthcare system perspective. Methods: A combination of the short-term decision tree and long-term Markov model was constructed. Clinical data were derived from the TASTE-SL and TASTE trials. To adjust for baseline characteristics between the two treatment groups, stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW) was applied, and both Average Treatment effect on the Treated (ATT) and Average Treatment Effect (ATE) weighted results were calculated to enhance comparability. Model parameters were extracted from published literature, public databases, and expert interviews. Sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to demonstrate the robustness of the base-case results. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients achieving mRS score ≤1 between the EDSL and EDCSI groups after sIPTW (ATT: 71.8% vs. 67.6%; ATE: 69.3% vs. 64.6%). Notably, EDSL showed clear cost-effectiveness advantages, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of -¥2,089.84 per QALY gained. All sensitivity and scenario analyses confirmed the robustness of the base-case findings. Conclusion: EDSL represents a more cost-effective therapy for AIS patients compared to EDCSI, offering comparable efficacy at a lower drug cost. A full 14-day treatment course may help maximize patient benefits.
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.