Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
2.
J Cutan Med Surg ; 24(6): 561-572, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32588642

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Several treatments for plaque psoriasis are available, but it remains challenging for physicians to make informed treatment decisions due to a lack of head-to-head trials. OBJECTIVES: This network meta-analysis (NMA) compares the efficacy of brodalumab to other biologic agents in Canada for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. METHODS: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before October 2017 was conducted to populate the NMA. Comparators included etanercept, infliximab, adalimumab, ustekinumab, secukinumab, ixekizumab, guselkumab, and placebo. The primary outcome was the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) response at the end of induction phase. A random effects Bayesian multinomial likelihood and probit link model analyzed PASI 75, 90, and 100 responses. Inconsistency and heterogeneity were assessed. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore potential effect modifiers like baseline PASI score, age, and weight. RESULTS: A total of 43 RCTs were included. Brodalumab 210 mg had significantly better PASI response than etanercept, ustekinumab, adalimumab, secukinumab, and guselkumab and comparable responses to infliximab and ixekizumab. Relative risk of PASI 90 response for brodalumab varied from 2.84 (95% credible interval [CrI]: 2.35-3.52, P < .05) to 0.99 (95% CrI: 0.88-1.11, ns) compared to etanercept and ixekizumab. This was similar across PASI 75 responses, but a larger relative risk between brodalumab and all comparators except ixekizumab was observed for PASI 100. No significant heterogeneity or inconsistencies were identified. The results were consistent across sensitivity analyses, indicating robustness of the results. CONCLUSION: Brodalumab 210 mg has efficacy superior to most biologic agents for moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis in Canada.


Asunto(s)
Antiinflamatorios no Esteroideos/uso terapéutico , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Fármacos Dermatológicos/uso terapéutico , Psoriasis/tratamiento farmacológico , Adalimumab/uso terapéutico , Teorema de Bayes , Canadá , Etanercept/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Infliximab/uso terapéutico , Metaanálisis en Red , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ustekinumab/uso terapéutico
3.
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis ; 12: 3065-3073, 2017.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29089755

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: COPD places a huge clinical and economic burden on the US health care system, with acute exacerbations representing a key driver of direct medical costs. Current treatments, although effective in reducing symptoms and limiting exacerbations, do not adequately target the underlying disease processes that drive exacerbation development. The Aerobika* oscillating positive expiratory pressure (OPEP) device has been shown in a real-world effectiveness study to lower the frequency of moderate-to-severe exacerbations during a 30-day post-exacerbation period. This study sought to determine the impact on exacerbations and costs and to determine the cost-effectiveness of the Aerobika* device. METHODS: Data from published literature and national fee schedules were used to model the cost-effectiveness of the Aerobika* device in patients who had experienced an exacerbation in the previous month, or a post-exacerbation care population. Exacerbation trends and the impact of the Aerobika* device on reducing exacerbation frequency were modeled using a one-year Markov model with monthly cycles and three health states: (i) no exacerbation, (ii) exacerbation, and (iii) death. Scenario analysis and one-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) were also performed. RESULTS: When the effect of Aerobika* device was assumed to last 30 days, use of the device resulted in cost-savings ($553 per patient) and improved outcomes (ie, six fewer exacerbations per 100 patients per year) compared to no OPEP/positive expiratory pressure therapy. When the effect of the Aerobika* device was assumed to extend beyond the conservative 30-day time frame, the Aerobika* device remained the dominant strategy (21 fewer exacerbations per 100 patients per year; cost savings of $1,952 per patient). Consistency in findings after performing OWSAs indicates the robustness of results. CONCLUSION: The Aerobika* device is a cost-effective treatment option that provides clinical benefit and results in direct medical cost savings in a post-exacerbation care COPD population.


Asunto(s)
Costos de la Atención en Salud , Pulmón/fisiopatología , Respiración con Presión Positiva/economía , Respiración con Presión Positiva/instrumentación , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/economía , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/terapia , Corticoesteroides/economía , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Antibacterianos/economía , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Costos de los Medicamentos , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/economía , Diseño de Equipo , Costos de Hospital , Humanos , Pulmón/efectos de los fármacos , Cadenas de Markov , Modelos Económicos , Admisión del Paciente/economía , Respiración con Presión Positiva/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/diagnóstico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/fisiopatología , Recuperación de la Función , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA