Cost–utility analysis of upadacitinib vs. dupilumab for atopic dermatitis in Australia
Upadacitinib is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with dupilumab; however, the minimal differences in outcomes suggest that both treatments may be comparable options for first-line therapy.
Authors
- Margit Polcz (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7366-7031)
- Deshan F. Sebaratnam (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5896-8178)
- James P. Pham (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9263-3889)
- Artiene Tatian (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6011-9757)
- Helen Sun (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2935-5417)
- Sophy Shih (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0049-2888)
- Grace X Li (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3201-9573)
- Shien‐Ning Chee
Institutions
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (AU)
- Liverpool Hospital (AU)
- Westmead Hospital (AU)
- UNSW Sydney (AU)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Clinical and Experimental Dermatology
- Published
- 2025-02-26
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ced/llaf097
- Citations
- 2
- Primary Topic
- Dermatology and Skin Diseases
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 4.01