Literature DB >> 23252359

The cost offsets and cost-effectiveness associated with pegylated drugs: a review of the literature.

Russell Becker1, Carole Dembek, Leigh Ann White, Louis P Garrison.   

Abstract

Pegylation (PEG) is used as both a drug-delivery and a drug-modification technology in ten drugs approved by the US FDA. Benefits of PEG drugs can include increased plasma half-life, longer absorption, improved tumor targeting and less antigenicity and immunogenicity. Clinical benefits of PEG drugs over non-PEG drugs may include reduced administration, improved efficacy, improved tolerability, and decreased severity and incidence of adverse events. This study reviews 37 economic literature publications featuring PEG drugs versus non-PEG versions. PEG drugs showed some reductions in overall costs resulting from various offsets including fewer administrations, lower adverse event treatment costs, reduced disease complication costs or reduced inpatient/outpatient costs. Of the 18 cost-effectiveness studies reviewed, 17 of them found PEG drugs to be cost effective versus the non-PEG drugs. Cost offsets and cost-effectiveness of PEG drugs have been demonstrated in multiple studies across various therapies, indications and country settings, and the results have been found to be stable when key parameters were varied in analyses. Further studies are needed to assess the potential for cost savings and cost-effectiveness for new PEG therapies in development.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23252359     DOI: 10.1586/erp.12.65

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res        ISSN: 1473-7167            Impact factor:   2.217


  6 in total

Review 1.  [Nanoparticles as drug delivery systems in ophthalmology].

Authors:  M Löscher; J Hurst; L Strudel; M S Spitzer; S Schnichels
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 1.059

2.  Peptide inhibitors of C3 activation as a novel strategy of complement inhibition for the treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria.

Authors:  Antonio M Risitano; Daniel Ricklin; Yijun Huang; Edimara S Reis; Hui Chen; Patrizia Ricci; Zhuoer Lin; Caterina Pascariello; Maddalena Raia; Michela Sica; Luigi Del Vecchio; Fabrizio Pane; Florea Lupu; Rosario Notaro; Ranillo R G Resuello; Robert A DeAngelis; John D Lambris
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 22.113

Review 3.  Targeted delivery system of nanobiomaterials in anticancer therapy: from cells to clinics.

Authors:  Su-Eon Jin; Hyo-Eon Jin; Soon-Sun Hong
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  The cost-utility of treating anemia with continuous erythropoietin receptor activator or Epoetin versus routine blood transfusions among chronic hemodialysis patients.

Authors:  Omar Maoujoud; Samir Ahid; Yahia Cherrah
Journal:  Int J Nephrol Renovasc Dis       Date:  2016-02-24

5.  The Cost-Effectiveness of Using Epoetin-Beta Versus Darbepoetin-Alfa for the Treatment of Anemia Among Chronic Hemodialysis Patients.

Authors:  Hanan AlKharboush; Fatimah Alshehri; Ibrahim Alatwi; Khaled Al Karni; Abdurahman Alatawi; Ahmed M Hamdan
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-12-04

Review 6.  Cost-effectiveness of continuous erythropoietin receptor activator in anemia.

Authors:  Holger Schmid
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2014-07-03
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.