Cost-effectiveness of nintedanib versus pirfenidone in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review.

IF 1.8 4区医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Pub Date : 2025-03-24 DOI:10.1080/14737167.2025.2480718

Aziz Rezapour, Mohammad Veysi-Sheikhrobat, Aghdas Souresrafil, Sajad Moeini, Tayebe Roghani, Abdollah Sayyad, Ahmad Tahmasebi-Ghorrabi

{"title":"Cost-effectiveness of nintedanib versus pirfenidone in the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a systematic review.","authors":"Aziz Rezapour, Mohammad Veysi-Sheikhrobat, Aghdas Souresrafil, Sajad Moeini, Tayebe Roghani, Abdollah Sayyad, Ahmad Tahmasebi-Ghorrabi","doi":"10.1080/14737167.2025.2480718","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Objective: To systematically review studies on the cost-effectiveness of pirfenidone compared to nintedanib in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).Methods: Data sources: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria: Full economic evaluations comparing pirfenidone versus nintedanib inIPF patients. Assessment: Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool forstudy quality.Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria with QHES scores of 0.91 or higher. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from $66,434 to $1,668,321 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the United States. Nintedanib was found to be cost-effective in five studies.Conclusions: Nintedanib appears to be a more cost-effective treatment for IPF compared to pirfenidone. Further research is needed, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, considering healthcare system perspectives and varied willingness-to-pay thresholds.Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42024543954).","PeriodicalId":12244,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2025.2480718","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Objective: To systematically review studies on the cost-effectiveness of pirfenidone compared to nintedanib in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF).

Methods: Data sources: PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science. Inclusion criteria: Full economic evaluations comparing pirfenidone versus nintedanib inIPF patients. Assessment: Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool forstudy quality.

Results: Nine studies met the inclusion criteria with QHES scores of 0.91 or higher. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranged from $66,434 to $1,668,321 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the United States. Nintedanib was found to be cost-effective in five studies.

Conclusions: Nintedanib appears to be a more cost-effective treatment for IPF compared to pirfenidone. Further research is needed, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, considering healthcare system perspectives and varied willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42024543954).

查看原文本刊更多论文

尼达尼布与吡非尼酮治疗特发性肺纤维化的成本-效果：系统评价

目的：系统回顾吡非尼酮与尼达尼布在特发性肺纤维化（IPF）患者中的成本-效果研究。方法：数据来源：PubMed、EMBASE、Scopus、Web of Science。纳入标准：比较吡非尼酮与尼达尼布治疗IPF患者的全面经济评价。评估：卫生经济研究质量（QHES）研究质量的工具。结果：9项研究符合纳入标准，QHES评分在0.91及以上。在美国，每个质量调整生命年（QALY）的增量成本效益比（ICERs）从66,434美元到1,668,321美元不等。在五项研究中发现尼达尼布具有成本效益。结论：9项研究符合纳入标准，QHES评分在0.91及以上。在美国，每个质量调整生命年（QALY）的增量成本效益比（ICERs）从66,434美元到1,668,321美元不等。在五项研究中发现尼达尼布具有成本效益。与吡非尼酮相比，尼达尼布似乎是一种更具成本效益的IPF治疗方法。需要进一步研究，特别是在低收入和中等收入国家，考虑到卫生保健系统的观点和不同的支付意愿阈值。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY

CiteScore

4.00

自引率

4.30%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research (ISSN 1473-7167) provides expert reviews on cost-benefit and pharmacoeconomic issues relating to the clinical use of drugs and therapeutic approaches. Coverage includes pharmacoeconomics and quality-of-life research, therapeutic outcomes, evidence-based medicine and cost-benefit research. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The journal adopts the unique Expert Review article format, offering a complete overview of current thinking in a key technology area, research or clinical practice, augmented by the following sections: Expert Opinion – a personal view of the data presented in the article, a discussion on the developments that are likely to be important in the future, and the avenues of research likely to become exciting as further studies yield more detailed results Article Highlights – an executive summary of the author’s most critical points.