Sponsorship-related outcome selection bias in published economic studies of triptans: Systematic review

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 237-245

  Peura, Piia K ^a,b   Martikainen, Janne A ^b   Purmonen, Timo T ^b   Turunen, Juha H O ^b  

^a Finnish Medicines Agency Fimea   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness; economic evaluation; outcome selection bias; sponsorship bias; triptans

Indexed keywords

TRYPTAMINE DERIVATIVE;

CONFLICT OF INTEREST; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DRUG COST; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; FINLAND; HUMAN; ORAL DRUG ADMINISTRATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PUBLISHING; REVIEW; STATISTICS;

ADMINISTRATION, ORAL; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DRUG COSTS; DRUG INDUSTRY; FINLAND; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PUBLICATION BIAS; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; TRYPTAMINES;

EID: 84859373020     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X11403834     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Friedberg M, Saffran B, Stinson TJ, Nelson W, Bennett CL. Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology. JAMA. 1999 ; 282 (15). 1453-7 (Pubitemid 29493799)
2. Baker CB, Johnsrud MT, Crismon ML, Rosenheck RA, Woods SW. Quantitative analysis of sponsorship bias in economic studies of antidepressants. Br J Psychiatry. 2003 ; 183: 498-506 (Pubitemid 37533195)
3. Hartmann M, Knoth H, Schulz D, Knoth S. Industry-sponsored economic studies in oncology vs studies sponsored by nonprofit organisations. Br J Cancer. 2003 ; 89 (8). 1405-8 (Pubitemid 37386591)
4. Miners AH, Garau M, Fidan D, Fischer AJ. Comparing estimates of cost effectiveness submitted to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) by different organisations: retrospective study. BMJ. 2005 ; 330 (7482). 65
5. Bell CM, Urbach DR, Ray JG, et al. Bias in published cost effectiveness studies: systematic review. BMJ. 2006 ; 332 (7543). 699-703
6. Fleurence RL, Spackman DE, Hollenbeak C. Does the funding source influence the results in economic evaluations? A case study in bisphosphonates for the treatment of osteoporosis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010 ; 28 (4). 295-306
7. Beutels P. Potential conflicts of interest in vaccine economics research: a commentary with a case study of pneumococcal conjugate vaccination. Vaccine. 2004 ; 22 (25-6). 3312-22 (Pubitemid 39078747)
8. Membe S, McGahan L, Cimon K, Gawel M, Giammarco R, Mierzwinski-Urban M. Triptans for Acute Migraine: Comparative Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness. 2007 [Technology report no 76]. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2007.
9. Ferrari MD, Roon KI, Lipton RB, Goadsby PJ. Oral triptans (serotonin 5-HT(1B/1D) agonists) in acute migraine treatment: a meta-analysis of 53 trials. Lancet. 2001 ; 358 (9294). 1668-75 (Pubitemid 33124324)
10. Ferrari MD, Goadsby PJ, Roon KI, Lipton RB. Triptans (serotonin, 5-HT1B/1D agonists) in migraine: detailed results and methods of a meta-analysis of 53 trials. Cephalalgia. 2002 ; 22 (8). 633-58 (Pubitemid 36609333)
11. Gracia Naya M. Cost effectiveness of treatment with triptanes in Spain. Rev Neurol. 2001 ; 33 (10). 921-4
12. Adelman JU, Belsey J. Meta-analysis of oral triptan therapy for migraine: number needed to treat and relative cost to achieve relief within 2 hours. J Manag Care Pharm. 2003 ; 9 (1). 45-52
13. Wells N, Hettiarachchi J, Drummond M, et al. A cost-effectiveness analysis of eletriptan 40 and 80 mg versus sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg in the acute treatment of migraine. Value Health. 2003 ; 6 (4). 438-47 (Pubitemid 36929732)
14. Gracia-Naya M, Rejas Gutiérrez J, Latorre Jiménez A, González Garcia P. Economic evaluation of acute migraine attack treatment with triptans in Spain. Neurologia. 2005 ; 20 (3). 121-32 (Pubitemid 40592977)
15. Reeder CE, Steadman S, Goldfarb SD. Economic comparison of oral triptans for management of acute migraine: implications for managed care. Am J Manag Care. 2002 ; 8 (3). S80-4
16. Williams P, Reeder CE. Cost-effectiveness of almotriptan and rizatriptan in the treatment of acute migraine. Clin Ther. 2003 ; 25 (11). 2903-19 (Pubitemid 37510600)
17. Williams P, Reeder CE. A comparison of the cost-effectiveness of almotriptan and sumatriptan in the treatment of acute migraine using a composite efficacy/tolerability end point. J Manag Care Pharm. 2004 ; 10 (3). 259-65
18. Mullins CD, Weis KA, Perfetto EM, Subedi PR, Healey PJ. Triptans for migraine therapy: a comparison based on number needed to treat and doses needed to treat. J Manag Care Pharm. 2005 ; 11 (5). 394-402
19. Perfetto EM, Weis KA, Mullins CD, Subedi P, Healey PJ. An economic evaluation of triptan products for migraine. Value Health. 2005 ; 8 (6). 647-55 (Pubitemid 43115149)
20. Thompson M, Gawel M, Desjardins B, Ferko N, Grima D. An economic evaluation of rizatriptan in the treatment of migraine. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005 ; 23 (8). 837-50 (Pubitemid 41420429)
21. Zhang L, Hay JW. Cost-effectiveness analysis of rizatriptan and sumatriptan versus Cafergot in the acute treatment of migraine. CNS Drugs. 2005 ; 19 (7). 635-42 (Pubitemid 41058373)
22. Kelman L, Von Seggern RL. Using patient-centered endpoints to determine the cost-effectiveness of triptans for acute migraine therapy. Am J Ther. 2006 ; 13 (5). 411-7 (Pubitemid 44435013)
23. Slof J, Badia X, Magaz S, Lainez M, Galvan J, Heras J. Cost-efficacy of oral triptans in the treatment of acute migraine. J Med Econ. 2005 ; 8: 27-43 (Pubitemid 40461649)
24. Mullins CD, Subedi PR, Healey PJ, Sanchez RJ. Economic analysis of triptan therapy for acute migraine: a Medicaid perspective. Pharmacotherapy. 2007 ; 27 (8). 1092-101 (Pubitemid 47173655)
25. Gori S, Morelli N, Acuto G, Caiola F, Iudice A, Murri L. A pharmacoeconomic evaluation of oral triptans in the treatment of migraine in Italy. Minerva Med. 2006 ; 97 (6). 467-77
26. Ramsberg J, Henriksson M. The cost-effectiveness of oral triptan therapy in Sweden. Cephalalgia. 2007 ; 27 (1). 54-62 (Pubitemid 46020802)
27. Roon KI, Lipton RB, Goadsby PJ, Ferrari MD. Placebo in triptan trials: efficacy, tolerability and consistency. Cephalalgia. 2001 ; 21: 405-6
28. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2003 ; 289 (4). 454-65 (Pubitemid 36119966)
29. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ. 2003 ; 326 (7400). 1167-70 (Pubitemid 36649048)
30. Sismondo S. Pharmaceutical company funding and its consequences: a qualitative systematic review. Contemp Clin Trials. 2008 ; 29 (2). 109-13 (Pubitemid 351248768)
31. Hutton JL, Williamson PR. Bias in meta-analysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. Appl Stat. 2000 ; 49 (3). 359-70
32. Williamson PR, Gamble C. Identification and impact of outcome selection bias in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2005 ; 24 (10). 1547-61 (Pubitemid 40716353)
33. Williamson PR, Gamble C, Altman DG, Hutton JL. Outcome selection bias in meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 2005 ; 14 (5). 515-24 (Pubitemid 41489523)
34. Drummond MF, Barbieri M, Wong JB. Analytic choices in economic models of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis: what makes a difference?. Med Decis Making. 2005 ; 25 (5). 520-33 (Pubitemid 41384066)
35. Drummond MF, Sculpher M. Common methodological flaws in economic evaluations. Med Care. 2005 ; 43: II-5 - II-14 (Pubitemid 41051042)
36. Gawel MJ, Worthington I, Maggisano A. A systematic review of the use of triptans in acute migraine. Can J Neurol Sci. 2001 ; 28 (1). 30-41
37. Oldman AD, Smith LA, McQuay HJ, Moore RA. Pharmacological treatments for acute migraine: quantitative systematic review. Pain. 2002 ; 97 (3). 247-57 (Pubitemid 34607220)
38. Belsey JD. Cost effectiveness of oral triptan therapy: a trans-national comparison based on a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004 ; 20 (5). 659-69 (Pubitemid 38685010)
39. Hedberg N, Ramsberg J. Slutraport: Genomgången av läkemedel mot migrän (The review of medicines used for treating migraine), Solna: Lakemedelsformansnamnden (LFN); 2005
40. Antonaci F, Sances G, Guaschino E, De Cillis I, Bono G, Nappi G. Meeting patient expectations in migraine treatment: what are the key endpoints?. J Headache Pain. 2008 ; 9 (4). 207-13
41. Pascual J, Garcia-Monco C, Roig C, Yusta Izquierdo A, Lopez-Gil A. Rizatriptan 10-mg wafer versus usual nontriptan therapy for migraine: analysis of return to function and patient preference. Headache. 2005 ; 45 (9). 1140-50 (Pubitemid 350004903)
42. Lainez MJ, Evers S, Kinge E, et al. Preference for rizatriptan 10-mg wafer v. eletriptan 40-mg tablet for acute treatment of migraine. Cephalalgia. 2006 ; 26 (3). 246-56
43. Diez FI, Straube A, Zanchin G. Patient preference in migraine therapy: a randomized, open-label, crossover clinical trial of acute treatment of migraine with oral almotriptan and rizatriptan. J Neurol. 2007 ; 254 (2). 242-9 (Pubitemid 46356062)
44. Bojke L, Claxton K, Sculpher M, Palmer S. Characterizing structural uncertainty in decision analytic models: a review and application of method. Value Health. 2009;12(5):739-49.