A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Examining Treatments for Cachexia Syndrome

Abstract

Objectives

This systematic review aims to critically evaluate and synthesize the economic outcomes of various therapeutic strategies employed to manage cachexia patients.

Methods

A comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials and observational studies was conducted from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2023, using PubMed, Google Scholar, Clinical Trials Registry, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, British Medical Journal, National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and ScienceDirect, following PRISMA guidelines. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards reporting guidelines.

Results

We identified six high to medium quality economic evaluations in four countries, focusing on cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and HIV/AIDS-associated cachexia. The results indicate that combination management strategies, specifically the use of nutritional supplements and exercise, are more cost-effective than usual care for cachexia syndrome. Additionally, two studies showed that dietary supplements alone were more cost-effective than usual care, and pharmacotherapy alone was more cost-effective than a placebo.

Conclusion

Combining several strategies, such as nutritional supplements and exercise, may be the most economically efficient method for managing cachexia compared to usual care or single treatment approaches. However, the restricted and diverse characteristics of the current research hinder the definitive conclusions.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to extend their sincere thanks to the Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Lahore, where the principal author is enrolled in a PhD program (Registration No. 70154481), working on cachexia. The current piece of writing is also part of his thesis.

Authors’ Contribution

Safeer Khan: Conceptualization, Methodology, formal analysis, writing an original draft, Writing, review, and editing. Safeer Ahmad Javid: Formal analysis, writing, review, and editing. Sabi Ur Rehman: Writing, review, and editing, data curation. Yasmeen Akhtar: Writing, review and editing, data curation. Muhammad Amir Khan: Writing, review, and editing.

Disclosure Statement

We have no conflicts of interest.

Human and Animal Rights’ Informed Consent

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data supporting this study’s findings are available in this article’s supplementary material.

Additional information

Funding

None.