ArticleAdvances in therapy2024
A Cost-Utility Analysis of Ferric Derisomaltose Versus Ferric Carboxymaltose in Patients with Iron Deficiency Anemia in China.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Economic evaluation of intravenous iron formulations for patients with iron deficiency anemia: a systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2025Pooled it
- Hypophosphatemia in Patients Receiving Intravenous Iron Supplementation for Iron-Deficiency Anemia: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The Significance of Hypophosphatemia in Deciding on an Optimal Clinical Choice of Parenteral Iron Therapy in Patients with Chronic Inflammatory Bowel Disease in Slovenia: An Umbrella Review and Economic Evaluation.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIntravenous (IV) iron is the recommended treatment for patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA) unresponsive to oral iron treatment, in whom oral iron is contraindicated, or where rapid iron replenishment is required. Ferric derisomaltose (FDI) and ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) are high-dose, rapid-infusion, IV iron formulations that have recently been compared in three head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which showed significantly higher incidence of hypophosphatemia after administration of FCM than FDI. The present study objective was to evaluate the cost-utility of FDI versus FCM in a population of patients with IDA in China.
methodsA previously-published patient-level simulation model was used to model the cost-utility of FDI versus FCM in China. The number of infusions of FDI and FCM was modeled based on the approved posology of the respective formulations using simplified tables of iron need in a population of patients with body weight and hemoglobin levels informed by a Chinese RCT of FCM. Data on the incidence of hypophosphatemia was obtained from the PHOSPHARE-IDA RCT, while data on disease-related quality of life were obtained from SF-36v2 data from the PHOSPHARE-IBD RCT.
resultsOver the 5-year time horizon, patients received 3.98 courses of iron treatment on average, requiring 0.90 fewer infusions of FDI than FCM (7.69 vs. 6.79). This resulted in iron procurement and administration cost savings of renminbi (RMB) 206 with FDI (RMB 3,519 vs. RMB 3,312). Reduced incidence of hypophosphatemia-related fatigue resulted in an increase of 0.07 quality-adjusted life years and further cost savings of RMB 782 over 5 years, driven by reduced need for phosphate testing and replenishment. FDI was therefore the dominant intervention.
conclusionsThe results showed that FDI would improve patient quality of life and reduce direct healthcare expenditure versus FCM in patients with IDA in China.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.