ArticleClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR2026
Cost-Effectiveness of Chondroitin Sulphate (with or without Glucosamine) Prescription in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Compared to NSAIDs and COXIBs.
Article in ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chondroitin sulfate, alone or associated with glucosamine (CS/CS+GLU), is an effective knee osteoarthritis (KOA) treatment, with fewer adverse effects (AEs) than non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors (COXIBs). Purpose: To estimate the CS/CS+GLU cost-effectiveness versus NSAIDs/COXIBs, due to the avoidance of mild-moderate or severe gastrointestinal AEs (GIAE), ischemic heart disease (IHD), acute kidney insufficiency (AKI), chronic kidney failure (CKF) and ischemic stroke (IS) from the Spanish National Health System (NHS) perspective. Methods: Two analyses were considered: 1) savings to the NHS from current CS/CS+GLU treatment; and 2) maximum savings that could be achieved by the NHS if all patients with KOA currently treated with NSAIDs/COXIB would be switched to CS/CS+GLU. AEs frequency, associated utilities loss and managing cost were obtained from medical literature and Spanish sources. A probabilistic model (second-order Monte Carlo simulation) was carried out for a 3-year time horizon. Treatment duration: 180 days (base case); 90 and 240 days (sensitivity analysis). Results: First analysis: 45,087 mild-moderate GIAE, 3,217 severe GIAE, 211 IHD, 1,087 AKI, 746 CKF and 3,359 IS, would be avoided with CS/CS+GLU. Discounting drugs cost, the three-year savings would be 57.1 million euros (savings probability: 80.7%). The savings per patient treated with CS/CS+GLU would amount to €38.02 (95% CI 14.06; €75.69), with a mean gain of 0.0023 (95% CI 0.0018-0.0027) QALY. The probability that CS/CS+GLU treatment was dominant (lower costs and QALY gain) or cost-effective (cost per QALY gained less than €25,000) was 80.7% and 98.1%, respectively. In the second analysis, savings for the NHS would amount to 387 million euros, with the CS/CS+GLU-only option being dominant and cost-effective in 100% of the analyses. Conclusion: The improved tolerability of CS/CS+GLU versus NSAIDs/COXIBs is expected to prevent thousands of AEs and generate considerable savings for the NHS, making it cost-effective treatment.
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.