ArticleBMC neurology2026
Characteristics, treatment patterns, healthcare resource use, and costs among adult patients diagnosed with neurofibromatosis type 1 and plexiform neurofibromas in the United States.
Article in BMC neurology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is a progressive rare genetic disorder that frequently involves the development of plexiform neurofibromas (PN). Until recently, there was no approved pharmacological treatment for adults with NF1-PN, and the disease burden is not well understood. This real-world retrospective study aimed to describe treatment patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), and costs among adults with NF1-PN in the US.
methodsData were obtained from the Merative™ MarketScan
resultsThis study included 944 patients with NF1-PN and 4,720 controls. The mean age was 39.6 (standard deviation: 15.6) years and 59.6% were female. Over a mean follow-up of 25.8 months, the most common treatment among patients with NF1-PN was prescription pain medication (69.5%), followed by debulking surgeries (22.9%), cytotoxic chemotherapy (7.0%), radiotherapy (4.8%), and targeted therapies (e.g., MEK inhibitors) (4.7%). All-cause HRU was significantly higher among patients than controls across all settings (1.6 vs. 0.27 inpatient days per patient per year [PPPY], 18.8 vs. 9.1 outpatient visits PPPY, 0.80 vs. 0.53 emergency department visits PPPY), with adjusted incidence rate ratios of 1.4 to 4.2 (all p < 0.001). Among patients with NF1-PN, 53% and 18% of all-cause inpatient days and outpatient visits, respectively, were attributable to an NF1 or PN diagnosis. The adjusted mean total healthcare costs were $23,516 PPPY higher among the NF1-PN ($34,398 PPPY) versus matched control ($6,149 PPPY) cohort, with a cost ratio of 4.3 (p < 0.001).
conclusionsThis real-world study identified a substantially higher HRU and economic burden among adult patients with versus without NF1-PN across all settings, highlighting the need for new treatments to manage NF1-PN among this population.
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.