Evidence mapPaperPMID 38565690Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2024

Cost-effectiveness of romosozumab for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture in Belgium.

Evelien Gielen, Martina Aldvén, John A Kanis, Fredrik Borgström, Emmanuelle Senior, Damon Willems

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Sequential and Long-term Therapy for Osteoporosis.Current osteoporosis reports · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Evelien GielenDepartment of Geriatrics, UZ Leuven, Louvain, Belgium.
Martina AldvénQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
John A KanisUniversity of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Fredrik BorgströmQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
Emmanuelle SeniorUCB Pharma, Brussels, Belgium.
Damon WillemsUCB Pharma, Brussels, Belgium. damon.willems@ucb.com.
Quantify Research (Sweden) · SEUCB Pharma (Belgium) · BEDepartment of Public Health · USUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with romosozumab-to-alendronate compared to alendronate monotherapy and teriparatide-to-alendronate, in postmenopausal osteoporotic women from a Belgian healthcare perspective. Romosozumab-to-alendronate was found to be cost-effective compared to alendronate monotherapy and dominant compared to teriparatide-to-alendronate for osteoporotic women at high risk of fracture in Belgium. PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sequential treatment with romosozumab followed by alendronate compared to alendronate monotherapy and teriparatide followed by alendronate, in postmenopausal osteoporotic women at high risk of fracture, from a Belgian healthcare perspective. Romosozumab is reimbursed in Belgium since December 2021.

methodsA Markov microsimulation model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of romosozumab-to-alendronate compared to alendronate monotherapy and to teriparatide-to-alendronate over a lifetime horizon. Patients transition between five different health states every 6 months based on fracture risks or death. The model was populated with Belgium-specific epidemiological and cost data, where available. The fracture risk reduction of romosozumab treatment was collated from the ARCH study, and from a published network meta-analysis. Costs were included from a healthcare perspective (NIHDI). Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), reported in Euro (€) 2022. Deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed.

resultsRomosozumab-to-alendronate was associated with 0.12 additional QALYs at an additional cost of €2314 compared to alendronate monotherapy, resulting in an ICER of €19,978. Compared to teriparatide-to-alendronate, romosozumab-to-alendronate was found to be dominant, with higher QALYs and lower costs. The base-case results were robust to uncertainty in the input parameters when conducting the sensitivity analysis.

conclusionSequential treatment with romosozumab followed by alendronate was found to be cost-effective compared to alendronate monotherapy and dominant compared to teriparatide followed by alendronate for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis at high risk of fracture in Belgium.

Indexed as

AlendronateAntibodies, MonoclonalBone Density Conservation AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisDrug CostsMarkov ChainsOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalOsteoporotic FracturesQuality-Adjusted Life YearsTeriparatideAgedBelgiumDrug Administration ScheduleDrug SubstitutionDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleAlendronateAntibodies, MonoclonalBone Density Conservation AgentsromosozumabTeriparatideCost-effectivenessEconomic evaluationImminent fracture riskMarkov-microsimulation modelOsteoporosisRecent fracture

Identifiers

PMID38565690
PMCPMC11211114
OpenAlexW4393573527

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.