Skip to main content
. 2023 Jul 1;41(11):1415–1435. doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01293-4
Dupilumab was evaluated in 14 comparisons and was mostly cost-effective, whereas upadacitinib was the only emergent treatment that was never classified as cost-effective.
One needs to be careful when comparing results of economic evaluations for atopic dermatitis, as the underlying perspectives, designs and guidelines differed and caused a great variance in results, especially for dupilumab comparisons.