Literature DB >> 25377850

A systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Mickaël Hiligsmann1, Silvia M Evers, Wafa Ben Sedrine, John A Kanis, Bram Ramaekers, Jean-Yves Reginster, Stuart Silverman, Caroline E Wyers, Annelies Boonen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Given the limited availability of healthcare resources and the recent introduction of new anti-osteoporosis drugs, the interest in the cost effectiveness of drugs in postmenopausal osteoporosis remains and even increases.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify all recent economic evaluations on drugs for postmenopausal osteoporosis, to critically appraise the reporting quality, and to summarize the results.
METHODS: A literature search using Medline, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation database and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry was undertaken to identify original articles published between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2013. Studies that assessed cost effectiveness of drugs in postmenopausal osteoporosis were included. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement was used to assess the quality of reporting of these articles.
RESULTS: Of 1,794 articles identified, 39 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. They were conducted in 14 different countries and nine active interventions were assessed. When compared with no treatment, active osteoporotic drugs were generally cost effective in postmenopausal women aged over 60-65 years with low bone mass, especially those with prior vertebral fractures. Key drivers of cost effectiveness included individual fracture risk, medication adherence, selected comparators and country-specific analyses. Quality of reporting varied between studies with an average score of 17.9 out of 24 (range 7-21.5).
CONCLUSION: This review found a substantial number of published cost-effectiveness analyses of drugs in osteoporosis in the last 6 years. Results and critical appraisal of these articles can help decision makers when prioritizing health interventions and can inform the development of future economic evaluations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25377850     DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0231-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  68 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of oral bisphosphonates for osteoporosis at different ages and levels of life expectancy.

Authors:  Annalise N Pham; Santanu K Datta; Thomas J Weber; Louise C Walter; Cathleen S Colón-Emeric
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 5.562

2.  Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.

Authors:  Don Husereau; Michael Drummond; Stavros Petrou; Chris Carswell; David Moher; Dan Greenberg; Federico Augustovski; Andrew H Briggs; Josephine Mauskopf; Elizabeth Loder
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Modelling the cost effectiveness of interventions for osteoporosis: issues to consider.

Authors:  Matt D Stevenson; Peter L Selby
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Incidence and economic burden of osteoporosis-related fractures in the United States, 2005-2025.

Authors:  Russel Burge; Bess Dawson-Hughes; Daniel H Solomon; John B Wong; Alison King; Anna Tosteson
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 6.741

5.  Risedronate versus alendronate in older patients with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture: an Italian cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Patrizia Berto; Stefania Maggi; Marianna Noale; Stefania Lopatriello
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2010-02-09       Impact factor: 3.636

6.  Cost-effective intervention thresholds against osteoporotic fractures based on FRAX® in Switzerland.

Authors:  K Lippuner; H Johansson; F Borgström; J A Kanis; R Rizzoli
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-01-06       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  The cost-effectiveness of strontium ranelate in the UK for the management of osteoporosis.

Authors:  F Borgström; O Ström; J Coelho; H Johansson; A Oden; E McCloskey; J A Kanis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-06-10       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  The cost-effectiveness of risedronate treatment in Japanese women with osteoporosis.

Authors:  Hansheng Ding; Nobuo Koinuma; Matt Stevenson; Michiya Ito; Yasutake Monma
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 2.626

9.  Cost-effectiveness of bazedoxifene versus raloxifene in the treatment of postmenopausal women in Spain.

Authors:  Josep Darbà; Nuria Pérez-Álvarez; Lisette Kaskens; Susana Holgado-Pérez; Jill Racketa; Javier Rejas
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2013-07-05

10.  European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  J A Kanis; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-10-19       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  34 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of denosumab versus oral alendronate for elderly osteoporotic women in Japan.

Authors:  T Mori; C J Crandall; D A Ganz
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Overdiagnosis of osteoporosis: fact or fallacy?

Authors:  J Compston
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Geographic variation in secondary fracture prevention after a hip fracture during 1999-2013: a UK study.

Authors:  A Shah; D Prieto-Alhambra; S Hawley; A Delmestri; J Lippett; C Cooper; A Judge; M K Javaid
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 4.507

4.  Cost-effectiveness of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry plus antiresorptive treatment in Australian women with breast cancer who receive aromatase inhibitors.

Authors:  P Marcin Sowa; Martin J Downes; Louisa G Gordon
Journal:  J Bone Miner Metab       Date:  2016-03-11       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  European guidance for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  J A Kanis; C Cooper; R Rizzoli; J-Y Reginster
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Cost-effectiveness of combined oral bisphosphonate therapy and falls prevention exercise for fracture prevention in the USA.

Authors:  T Mori; C J Crandall; D A Ganz
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2016-10-11       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Dedicated Perioperative Hip Fracture Comanagement Programs are Cost-effective in High-volume Centers: An Economic Analysis.

Authors:  Eric Swart; Eshan Vasudeva; Eric C Makhni; William Macaulay; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  The Cost-Effectiveness of Screening in the Community to Reduce Osteoporotic Fractures in Older Women in the UK: Economic Evaluation of the SCOOP Study.

Authors:  David A Turner; Rebekah Fong Soe Khioe; Lee Shepstone; Elizabeth Lenaghan; Cyrus Cooper; Neil Gittoes; Nicholas C Harvey; Richard Holland; Amanda Howe; Eugene McCloskey; Terence W O'Neill; David Torgerson; Richard Fordham
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 9.  Fracture prediction, imaging and screening in osteoporosis.

Authors:  Nicholas R Fuggle; Elizabeth M Curtis; Kate A Ward; Nicholas C Harvey; Elaine M Dennison; Cyrus Cooper
Journal:  Nat Rev Endocrinol       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 43.330

Review 10.  Hip protectors are cost-effective in the prevention of hip fractures in patients with high fracture risk.

Authors:  R T A L de Bot; H D Veldman; A M Witlox; L W van Rhijn; M Hiligsmann
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.