PRS18 Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations, Utility Estimates, Resource Utilisation, and Costs in Chronic Idiopathic Urticaria

Woods, M.S.; Zimovetz, Evelina; Beard, Stephen; Balp, MM

doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.08.2017

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although this review included a large number of cost studies by proportion, previously conducted reviews primarily considered economic evaluations such as CEAs and CUAs and therefore reported a high proportion of CEAs and CUAs and studies involving model-based analyses [ 29 , 30 , 38 – 40 ]. For those reviews, 62% to 100% of studies included were CEAs or CUAs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to a database search, references cited in each of the included studies and relevant (but not included) systematic reviews were manually searched to identify any additional relevant studies, as recommended by the CRD and Cochrane guidelines [ 29 , 30 ]. A hand search of select academic, industry, and medical society proceedings from 2018 to 2020 was also conducted to identify any recent publications that may not have been published yet, including those from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR), the European Association of Hospital Pharmacists, and the Society for Investigative Dermatology.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence related to CU, however, is hindered due to a lack of studies in general. A review conducted from January 2000 to December 2012 found only three studies that evaluated treatments for CU from an economic standpoint or considered their utility estimates [ 29 ]. More recent reviews have encountered a similar paucity of studies available for CU [ 29 , 30 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost Studies of the Treatment of Psoriasis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Chronic Urticaria

Igarashi

Yuasa

Yonemoto

et al. 2022

Dermatol Ther (Heidelb)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Psoriasis (PSO), atopic dermatitis (AD), and chronic urticaria (CU) are common manifestations of immunological skin and subcutaneous conditions and have been shown to have a substantial impact on the quality of life of patients. The cost of treating those conditions can also be high, as the use of biologic treatments has become more common for moderate to severe patients. In this review, we examine characteristics of economic evaluations and cost studies conducted for the three conditions. Methods A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2016 to October 26, 2020 to identify economic evaluations where the cost of one or more drug treatment was evaluated and cost studies covering any intervention type. Each database was searched using keyword and MeSH terms related to treatment costs (e.g., health care cost, drug cost, etc.) and each condition (e.g., PSO, AD, eczema, CU, etc.). Results A total of 123 studies were reviewed, including 104 studies (85%) of PSO (including psoriasis, plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis vulgaris), 14 studies (11%) of AD, and 5 studies (4%) of CU. Seventy-two studies (59%) reviewed reported the inclusion of biologic treatments, 10 studies (8%) did not include biologic treatments, and 41 studies (33%) did not report whether or not a biologic treatment was included. While nearly all studies (98%) included direct costs, only 22 studies (18%) included indirect costs. Conclusions Economic evaluations for AD and CU may be needed in order to better understand the value of new treatments. Moreover, a clearer delineation for biologic treatments and indirect costs (i.e., productivity losses and gains) may be required. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00774-2.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%