Author
Listed:
- Iris W A Boot
- Georgina Shaw
- Yolande F M Ramos
- Mary Murphy
- Ingrid Meulenbelt
- Hubertus J M Vrijhoef
- on behalf of the AutoCRAT consortium
Abstract
Objectives: Current osteoarthritis treatments are designed to reduce pain and improve mobility instead of promoting the regeneration of cartilage. Cell-based therapies are being developed for the treatment of osteoarthritis. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of mesenchymal stromal cells and extracellular vesicle treatments compared to standard of care for patients with Kellgren-Lawrence stage II knee osteoarthritis in the Netherlands, from a hospital and societal perspective. Design: A Markov model was developed to assess the 40-year incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of mesenchymal stromal cells and/or extracellular vesicle treatments produced by automated or manual production methods, compared to standard of care. Secondary outcomes were amount of total knee replacement and total knee replacement revision surgeries. In addition, one-way sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses were performed. Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from a hospital perspective were -€10,982.10 for automatically produced mesenchymal stromal cells, -€9,301.79 for manually produced mesenchymal stromal cells, -€12,793.17 for automatically produced mesenchymal stromal cells and extracellular vesicle, and -€11,998.02 for manually produced mesenchymal stromal cells and extracellular vesicle versus standard of care. From the societal perspective incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were €68,870.58 for automatically produced mesenchymal stromal cells, -€67,280.27 for manually produced mesenchymal stromal cells, -€70,771.65 for automatically produced mesenchymal stromal cells and extracellular vesicle, and -€69,976.50 for manually produced mesenchymal stromal cells and extracellular vesicle versus standard of care. The amount of total knee replacement surgeries per 1,000 patients was 426 for the cell treatment groups, and 609 for the standard of care group, and 19 and 30 total knee replacement revision surgeries, respectively. Conclusions: This model, inherent to its assumptions, shows that hiMSC and EV treatments are cheaper and more effective for patients with knee osteoarthritis, from both perspectives. Moreover, they are expected to lower the number of surgeries. These conclusions persist among all scenario analyses.
Suggested Citation
Iris W A Boot & Georgina Shaw & Yolande F M Ramos & Mary Murphy & Ingrid Meulenbelt & Hubertus J M Vrijhoef & on behalf of the AutoCRAT consortium, 2026.
"HiMSC and EV derived treatments increase Quality of Life and reduce amount of Knee Replacement Surgeries compared to current standard of care for knee osteoarthritis patients in The Netherlands,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(3), pages 1-13, March.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0344203
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0344203
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0344203. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.