↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacoeconomic burden in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: from systematic reviews to real clinical practice studies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pharmacoeconomic burden in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis: from systematic reviews to real clinical practice studies
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-15-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ennio Lubrano, Antonio Spadaro

Abstract

The economic assessment of treatment options in a chronic and severe disease like Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) is crucial to estimate the burden of costs. In particular, the impact of new costly medications such as biologic agents have been studied to figure this important aspect of a multifaceted disease. In a previous observational, longitudinal multicentre cost evaluation study, the results showed that biologic agents are cost-effective. This study was obtained from the real clinical practice and encompassed PsA patients refractory to traditional treatments. Similar data were also obtained from reviews analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). Recently, Cawson et al. performed a systematic review, network meta-analysis and economic evaluation of biological therapy for the management of active PsA. The review was conducted to identify relevant, recently published studies and the new trial data were synthesized, via a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA), to estimate the relative efficacy of the TNF-α inhibitors in terms of Psoriatic Arthritis Response Criteria (PsARC) response, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) scores and Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI). In particular the analysis showed that, on average, etanercept was the most cost-effective treatment and, at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence willingness-to-pay threshold of between £20,000 to £30,000, etanercept is the preferred option. This study, as a systematic review, has been focused on main RCTs on active PsA treated by biological DMARDs and limitations to this analysis arise from a paucity of data on long-term follow up, as well as radiological progression and long-term safety. These interesting results reflected the important role of biologic agents in the management of PsA, highlighting their efficacy and cost-effectiveness. However, there are some unmet needs for pharmacoeconomic considerations based on prospective and/or on real clinical practice studies, as well as considering all the intriguing aspects of this challenging disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Greece 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 60 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 24%
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Other 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 48%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 13 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 February 2023.
All research outputs
#6,075,316
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,125
of 4,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,422
of 306,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#21
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,063 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 306,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.