Back to Search Results

Economic evaluation of ferric carboxymaltose compared with placebo in iron-deficient patients with heart failure: a systematic review

Health Management and Economics Research Center, Health Management Research Institute, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Department of Health Services and Health Promotion, School of Health, Occupational Environment Research Center, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran. Department of Health Services Management, School of Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. shamsaie.m@iums.ac.ir. Department of English Language Teaching, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Research Center, Addiction Institute, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran. Department of Health Services Management, School of Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

International journal of clinical pharmacy. 2023
Full text from:

Other resources

PICO Summary

Population

Iron-deficient patients with heart failure (HF), (7 studies).

Intervention

Ferric carboxymaltose (FCM).

Comparison

Placebo.

Outcome

The included studies investigated cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, and cost-benefit analysis, and used the CHEERS tool to evaluate the quality of the studies. The CHEERS scores for most of the studies (n = 6) were 0.77 or higher (very good quality). The lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of FCM ($1,801.96) was from Italy, and the highest ICER per QALY of FCM ($25,981.28) South Korea. Results of the studies showed that FCM, compared to placebo, was cost-effective in iron-deficient patients with HF.
Abstract
BACKGROUND It has been shown that ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) improves symptoms and quality of life in iron-deficient patients with heart failure (HF). AIM: We aimed to systematically review studies conducted on the cost-effectiveness of FCM compared to placebo in iron-deficient patients with HF. METHOD We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science to find the relevant studies. After removing duplicates, two authors independently evaluated the titles, abstracts, and full texts. We included studies that investigated the full economic evaluations of FCM in HF patients with iron deficiency (cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, and cost-benefit analysis) and used the CHEERS tool to evaluate the quality of the studies. RESULTS Seven studies were included which evaluated the economic analysis of treatments with FCM in iron-deficient patients with HF. The CHEERS scores for most of the studies (n = 6) were 0.77 or higher (very good quality). The lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of FCM ($1801.96) was from Italy, and the highest ICER per QALY of FCM ($25,981.28) South Korea. Results of the studies showed that FCM, compared to placebo, was cost-effective in iron-deficient patients with HF. CONCLUSION FCM is a cost-effective treatment for iron-deficient patients with HF. Considering the fact that all the included studies in the present systematic review took place in high-income countries, we recommend further studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of FCM in low- and middle-income countries.
Study details
Study Design : Economic Study
Language : eng
Credits : Bibliographic data from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine