Review of health economic analyses in atopic dermatitis: how diverse is the literature?

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a common chronic, pruritic inflammatory skin disease. It is associated with a high personal burden of illness and economic consequences. Since AD can occur at any age, and many treatments and prevention options exist, a high diversity of health economic findings can be expected.

Areas covered: A literature search was performed in January 2018 with the objective to report on previously published health economic analyses in AD. In total, 89 analyses were identified. Most analyses focused on the cost-of-illness (n = 34; 38%) followed by cost-utility and/or cost-effectiveness evaluations (n = 26; 29%) and cost analyses (n = 12; 13%) of treatments in AD. Further evaluations dealt with the prevention of AD (n = 13; 15%). Besides the different methods of health economic analyses, high variety was identified concerning the target population, comprised costs, effectiveness measures, comparators, and the modeling method.

Expert commentary: Given the different health-care environments and methodologies chosen, health economic analyses in AD cannot be compared with each other and cannot be related to other landscapes of care. Nevertheless, the analyses identified give hint for a high socioeconomic impact of AD on the one hand and unmet needs from the patient perspective on the other.

KEYWORDS:

• Atopic dermatitis
• eczema
• health economics
• costs
• economic evaluation
• cost-of-illness
• cost-effectiveness
• cost-utility
• disease burden

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer disclosures

One reviewer declares they have received research, speaking and/or consulting support from a variety of companies including Galderma, GSK/Stiefel, Almirall, Leo Pharma, Boehringer Ingelheim, Mylan, Celgene, Pfizer, Ortho Dermatology, Abbvie, Samsung, Janssen, Lilly, Menlo, Merck, Novartis, Regeneron, Sanofi, Novan, Qurient, National Biological Corporation, Caremark, Advance Medical, Sun Pharma, Suncare Research, Informa, UpToDate and National Psoriasis Foundation.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.