ArticleJAMA network open2025
Cost-Effectiveness of MASH Diagnosis and Management Approaches Among Those With Type 2 Diabetes.
Article in JAMA network open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is under-recognised: Should hepatic elastography be integrated into early risk stratification for people with type 2 diabetes?Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Letter to the editor on "Evaluating treatment response thresholds for cost-effective treatment in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease".Clinical and molecular hepatology · 2026Article
- Assessing Europe's policy readiness to confront the MASLD/MASH public health threat.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Review
- Overcoming the barriers in the screening, diagnosis, and follow-up of patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH).Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2026Review
- Metabolic liver disease: A summary of major guidelines and identifying opportunities to improve future guidelines.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Review
- Semaglutide versus resmetirom for noncirrhotic MASH with moderate to advanced fibrosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2026Article
- Reduced risk of liver-related events among patients receiving individualized nutrition-focused remote care in the United States.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2026Article
- TASL practice guidance for the diagnosis and management of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD).Hepatology forum · 2026Article
- Progression of Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatohepatitis in US Adults Using Linked Records and Claims.Gastro hep advances · 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
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) represents a high, underprioritized burden among noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) and people living with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Objective: To identify cost-effective management approaches to prevent, detect, and treat MASH and liver fibrosis in people living with T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation consisted of a generalized cost-effectiveness analysis (GCEA) that was conducted for 12 countries (Brazil, Chile, Germany, Italy, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Tanzania, Thailand, and the United States), across all 6 World Health Organization (WHO) regions. A cohort state-transition model simulated liver disease development and its impact on a synthetic cohort, aged 19 years and older and living with T2D, over their lifespan across 10 liver health states. Exposures: Using an 80% coverage level, 14 management approaches were compared, including screening via the Fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) test and Enhanced Liver Fibrosis (ELF) test or vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) as well as treatment with pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were the average cost-effectiveness ratios (ACERs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), which were used to construct care expansion paths by ranking the management approaches in order of cost-effectiveness. The main measures were the total incremental costs and the total incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of each intervention. Results: In this GCEA, the outcomes were evaluated with respect to country-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds. The standard of care had the lowest ACERs in 8 countries (not in Chile, Germany, Saudi Arabia, or the United States). Treatment with intensive lifestyle interventions (ILIs), after screening via ELF or VCTE, was cost-effective in all countries. ILIs and treatment with semaglutide was cost-effective in 11 countries (not in Tanzania); ILIs and treatment with resmetirom was cost-effective in 8 countries (not in Brazil, South Africa, Tanzania, or Thailand). Conclusion and Relevance: In this economic evaluation, screening followed by ILIs was found to be a cost-effective management approach for MASH and liver fibrosis among people living with T2D in all countries. Screening followed by pharmacological treatment was cost-effective in most countries. These results can inform health policy decision-making and further the development of WHO recommended interventions to address NCDs.
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.