ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Cost-utility analysis of telitacicept versus belimumab in the treatment of systemic lupus erythematosus in China.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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
Objective: Telitacicept and belimumab are the only two approved biologics in China for treating systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). With the widespread clinical use of biologics, more reliable clinical evidence has been provided. This study seeks to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two biologic treatments for SLE in China by utilizing current medication prices and the most recent clinical research. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing telitacicept and belimumab was conducted by developing a lifetime SLE partition survival model using the Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index 2000 (SLEDAI-2 K) score, which considers the relationship between organ damage and death. The data were extracted from the literature with model assumptions. Scenario analysis of short term treatment (5 years) and typical one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: After lifetime simulation, compared to belimumab treatment, telitacicept treatment can save a total of ¥57751.00, including expenses of drug usage and treatment of complications. Meanwhile, it gained 0.499 quality adjusted life years, resulted in a negative ICER. Telitacicept is more cost-saving than belimumab (Dominant). Conclusion: Under current pricing, treatment settings and efficacy data in China, telitacicept demonstrates superior cost-effectiveness compared with belimumab for long-term SLE management by reducing medication costs while delivering additional health 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.