Evaluation of the cost-utility of phosphate binders as a treatment option for hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the economic evaluations

Chaiyakittisopon, Kamolpat; Pattanaprateep, Oraluck; Ruenroengbun, Narisa; Sapankaew, Tunlanut; Ingsathit, Atiporn; McKay, Gareth J.; Attia, John; Thakkinstian, Ammarin

doi:10.1007/s10198-021-01275-3

Cited by 16 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In some cases, the related data were extracted from probabilistic sensitivity analyses, like the cost-effect plane with scatterplot graphs. For studies not reported directly, we calculated the INB and its 95% CI based on the 5 scenarios in line with previous recommendations using the data extracted from the articles (Appendix S2 in the Online Supplementary Document ) [ 22 , 24 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and control of COVID-19: Systematic review of 85 modelling studies

Zhou

Yan

et al. 2022

J Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background We aimed to quantitatively summarise the health economic evaluation evidence of prevention and control programs addressing COVID-19 globally. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the economic and health benefit of interventions for COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library of economic evaluation from December 31, 2019, to March 22, 2022, to identify relevant literature. Meta-analyses were done using random-effects models to estimate pooled incremental net benefit (INB). Heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 statistics and publication bias was assessed by Egger’s test. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021267475. Results Of 16 860 studies identified, 85 articles were included in the systematic review, and 25 articles (10 studies about non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs), five studies about vaccinations and 10 studies about treatments) were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled INB of NPIs, vaccinations, and treatments were $1378.10 (95% CI = $1079.62, $1676.59), $254.80 (95% CI = $169.84, $339.77) and $4115.11 (95% CI = $1631.09, $6599.14), respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed similar findings. Conclusions NPIs, vaccinations, and treatments are all cost-effective in combating the COVID-19 pandemic. However, evidence was mostly from high-income and middle-income countries. Further studies from lower-income countries are needed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and control of COVID-19: Systematic review of 85 modelling studies

Zhou

Yan

et al. 2022

J Glob Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, meta-analyses on cost-effectiveness studies have only been attempted in 5 studies in different fields of medicine by one other research team [ 21 - 25 ] but not yet in the area of mental health interventions. The theoretical method by Crespo et al [ 20 ] has been practically applied and explained by Bagepally et al [ 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fortunately, Crespo et al [ 20 ] developed a theoretical framework to perform these kinds of analyses. This method has been successfully applied by another research team in several studies in different areas of medicine [ 21 - 25 ]. Currently, no meta-analysis on the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders has been conducted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of Internet Interventions Compared With Treatment as Usual for People With Mental Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Rohrbach¹,

Dingemans²,

Evers³

et al. 2023

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The economic costs of mental disorders for society are huge. Internet-based interventions are often coined as cost-effective alternatives to usual care, but the evidence is mixed. Objective The aim was to review the literature on the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with usual care and to provide an estimate of the monetary benefits of such interventions compared with usual care. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted, which included participants with symptoms of mental disorders; investigated a telephone- or internet-based intervention; included a control condition in the form of treatment as usual, psychological placebo, waiting list control, or bibliotherapy; reported outcomes on both quality of life and costs; and included articles published in English. Electronic databases such as PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used. Data on risk of bias, quality of the economic evaluation, quality-adjusted life years, and costs were extracted from the included studies, and the incremental net benefit was calculated and pooled. Results The search yielded 6226 abstracts, and 37 studies with 14,946 participants were included. The quality of economic evaluations of the included studies was rated as moderate, and the risk of bias was high. A random-effects approach was maintained. Analyses suggested internet interventions were slightly more effective than usual care in terms of quality-adjusted life years gain (Hedges g=0.052, 95% CI 0.010-0.094; P=.02) and equally expensive (Hedges g=0.002, 95% CI −0.080 to 0.84; P=.96). The pooled incremental net benefit was US $255 (95% CI US $91 to US $419; P=.002), favoring internet interventions over usual care. The perspective of the economic evaluation and targeted mental disorder moderated the results. Conclusions The findings indicate that the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with a care-as-usual approach is likely, but generalizability to new studies is poor given the substantial heterogeneity. This is the first study in the field of mental health to pool cost-effectiveness outcomes in an aggregate data meta-analysis. Trial Registration PROSPERO CRD42019141659; https://tinyurl.com/3cu99b34

show abstract

“…The global burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with high economic costs as well as rapidly rising morbidity and mortality. CKD is projected to become one of the leading causes of reduced life expectancy worldwide within the next 20 years [ 1–4 ]. Aggravatingly, chronic kidney disease is expected to exacerbate the financial strain on healthcare.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ferric citrate for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia and anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Zheng

Deng

et al. 2022

Renal Failure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Hyperphosphatemia and anemia, which are common complications of chronic kidney disease (CKD), can independently contribute to cardiovascular events. Several previous studies have found that the iron-based phosphate binder, ferric citrate (FC), could be beneficial to both hyperphosphatemia and anemia. Methods Relevant literature from PUBMED, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CCRCT) and MEDLINE databases were searched up to 21 February 2022, in order to conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy, safety and economic benefits of ferric citrate treatment in CKD patients with hyperphosphatemia and anemia. The meta-analysis was conducted independently by two reviewers using the RevMan software (version 5.3). Results In total, this study included 16 randomized clinical trials (RCT) involving 1754 participants. The meta-analysis showed that ferric citrate could significantly reduce the serum phosphorus in CKD patients compared to the placebo control groups (MD −1.76 mg/dL, 95% CI (−2.78, −0.75); p = 0.0007). In contrast, the difference between ferric citrate treatment and active controls, such as non-iron-based phosphate binders, sevelamer, calcium carbonate, lanthanum carbonate and sodium ferrous citrate, was not statistically significant (MD − 0.09 mg/dL, 95% CI (−0.35, 0.17); p = 0.51). However, ferric citrate could effectively improve hemoglobin levels when compared to the active drug (MD 0.43 g/dL, 95% CI (0.04, 0.82); p = 0.03) and placebo groups (MD 0.39 g/dL, 95% CI (0.04, 0.73); p = 0.03). According to eight studies, ferric citrate was found to be cost-effective treatment in comparison to control drugs. Most of the adverse events (AE) following ferric citrate treatment were mild at most. Conclusion Collectively, our review suggests that iron-based phosphate binder, ferric citrate is an effective and safe treatment option for CKD patients with hyperphosphatemia and anemia. More importantly, this alternative treatment may also less expensive. Nevertheless, more scientific studies are warranted to validate our findings.

show abstract

Evaluation of the cost-utility of phosphate binders as a treatment option for hyperphosphatemia in chronic kidney disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the economic evaluations

Cited by 16 publications

References 63 publications

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and control of COVID-19: Systematic review of 85 modelling studies

Cost-effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and control of COVID-19: Systematic review of 85 modelling studies

Cost-effectiveness of Internet Interventions Compared With Treatment as Usual for People With Mental Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Ferric citrate for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia and anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About