Letícia P Leonart1, Helena H L Borba2, Vinicius L Ferreira1, Bruno S Riveros1, Roberto Pontarolo3,4. 1. Graduate Program in Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil. 2. Department of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Street Pref. Lothário Meissner, 632, Curitiba, Paraná, 80210-170, Brazil. 3. Graduate Program in Pharmaceutical Sciences, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil. pontarolo@ufpr.br. 4. Department of Pharmacy, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Street Pref. Lothário Meissner, 632, Curitiba, Paraná, 80210-170, Brazil. pontarolo@ufpr.br.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Acromegaly is a rare disease that results in the enlargement of body extremities and in organomegaly. Treatments include surgery, drugs, and radiotherapy, which are all onerous. Therefore, well-conducted cost-analyses are crucial in the decision-making process. METHODS: A systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies on acromegaly therapies was performed following PRISMA and Cochrane recommendations. The search for records was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (May 2018). The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joana Briggs Institute Tool. RESULTS: From initial 547 records, 16 studies were included in the review. The studies could present more than one economic evaluation, and encompassed cost-effectiveness (n = 13), cost-utility (n = 5), and cost-consequence (n = 1) analyses. All studies were model-based and evaluated only direct medical costs. Eleven records did not mention discounting and only 10 performed sensitivity analyses. The characteristic of the studies, the cost-effectiveness results and the studies' conclusions are described and commented upon. The main limitation of the studies was discussed and aspects to improve in future studies were pointed out. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness studies on acromegaly have been performed in several scenarios, evaluating different phases of treatment. However, the studies present limitations and, overall, were considered of moderate quality. Further economic models should be developed following health economics guidelines recommendations, and must improve transparency.
PURPOSE:Acromegaly is a rare disease that results in the enlargement of body extremities and in organomegaly. Treatments include surgery, drugs, and radiotherapy, which are all onerous. Therefore, well-conducted cost-analyses are crucial in the decision-making process. METHODS: A systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies on acromegaly therapies was performed following PRISMA and Cochrane recommendations. The search for records was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (May 2018). The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joana Briggs Institute Tool. RESULTS: From initial 547 records, 16 studies were included in the review. The studies could present more than one economic evaluation, and encompassed cost-effectiveness (n = 13), cost-utility (n = 5), and cost-consequence (n = 1) analyses. All studies were model-based and evaluated only direct medical costs. Eleven records did not mention discounting and only 10 performed sensitivity analyses. The characteristic of the studies, the cost-effectiveness results and the studies' conclusions are described and commented upon. The main limitation of the studies was discussed and aspects to improve in future studies were pointed out. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-effectiveness studies on acromegaly have been performed in several scenarios, evaluating different phases of treatment. However, the studies present limitations and, overall, were considered of moderate quality. Further economic models should be developed following health economics guidelines recommendations, and must improve transparency.
Authors: Andrea Giustina; Philippe Chanson; David Kleinberg; Marcello D Bronstein; David R Clemmons; Anne Klibanski; Aart J van der Lely; Christian J Strasburger; Steven W Lamberts; Ken K Y Ho; Felipe F Casanueva; Shlomo Melmed Journal: Nat Rev Endocrinol Date: 2014-02-25 Impact factor: 43.330
Authors: Pamela U Freda; Laurence Katznelson; Aart Jan van der Lely; Carlos M Reyes; Shouhao Zhao; Daniel Rabinowitz Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2005-05-10 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Luis Margusino-Framiñán; Sonia Pertega-Diaz; Lara Pena-Bello; Susana Sangiao-Alvarellos; Elena Outeiriño-Blanco; Francisco Pita-Gutierrez; Salvador Pita-Fernandez; Fernando Cordido Journal: Eur J Intern Med Date: 2015-08-20 Impact factor: 4.487
Authors: Shaun J Kilty; Myriam G M Hunink; Lisa Caulley; Eline Krijkamp; Mary-Anne Doyle; Kednapa Thavorn; Fahad Alkherayf; Nick Sahlollbey; Selina X Dong; Jason Quinn; Stephanie Johnson-Obaseki; David Schramm Journal: Pituitary Date: 2022-08-27 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Laura Sánchez-Cenizo; Javier Aller; José Manuel Martínez-Sesmero; Nuria Mir; Carmen Peral; Darío Rubio-Rodríguez; Carlos Rubio-Terrés Journal: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Date: 2019-07-22
Authors: Nina Ionovici; Mara Carsote; Dana Cristina Terzea; Anca Mihaela Predescu; Anne Marie Rauten; Mihaela Popescu Journal: Rom J Morphol Embryol Date: 2020 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 1.033
Authors: Annamaria Colao; Marcello D Bronstein; Thierry Brue; Laura De Marinis; Maria Fleseriu; Mirtha Guitelman; Gerald Raverot; Ilan Shimon; Jürgen Fleck; Pritam Gupta; Alberto M Pedroncelli; Mônica R Gadelha Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2020-06 Impact factor: 6.664