SynthesisPharmacoEconomics2026
Cost-Utility Analyses of Systemic Treatments for Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis in the UK: A Systematic Review of Modelling Methods.
Synthesis in PharmacoEconomics, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPsoriasis is a chronic inflammatory skin condition with a significant cost burden on the UK National Health Service (NHS). The objective of this systematic review is to describe and analyse the methods used in UK-based cost-utility analyses of systemic treatments for psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis.
methodsWe registered the review protocol on PROSPERO (CRD420251179345). We searched Embase, MEDLINE, EconLit, NHS Economic Evaluations Database, and the websites of UK health technology assessment (HTA) organisations on 1 December 2025 with no language or date restrictions. We also checked the reference lists of previous systematic reviews for additional studies. The review included journal publications and HTA submission documents that reported cost-utility models evaluating systemic treatments for psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis in a UK setting. We conducted a narrative synthesis of modelling methods using all sources of information for each model. We evaluated model quality using the Drummond checklist.
resultsSearches identified 659 unique, potentially relevant records (databases, n = 582; reference lists, n = 13; HTA websites, n = 64). After screening, we included 68 reports detailing 35 cost-utility analyses (psoriasis, n = 18; psoriatic arthritis, n = 17). Most followed a similar cohort-level model structure with induction and maintenance phases, but approaches to modelling treatment sequences varied and may not reflect clinical practice. Most psoriatic arthritis models accounted for both skin and joint symptoms, but psoriasis models only considered skin symptoms, and neither group directly modelled the impact of other comorbidities. Additional research would be beneficial to better inform parameters for efficacy in sequences of treatment and disease-related costs. The review was limited by incomplete reporting for some models.
conclusionsModel structures in psoriasis cost-utility analyses are well-established, but future work should address limitations in approaches to treatment sequencing and comorbidities by better leveraging real-world evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42420624What 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.