Beata Smela

Dr. Beata Smela

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

6Years (2021-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
BSBeata Smela
Beata Smela
MTMondher Toumi
Mondher Toumi
KŚKarolina Świerk
Karolina Świerk
CFClement Francois
Clement Francois
MBMałgorzata Biernikiewicz
Małgorzata Biernikiewicz
LBLaurent Boyer
Laurent Boyer
Introduction: A rapid literature review (RLR) is an alternative to systematic literature review (SLR) that can speed up the analysis of newly published data. The objective was to identify and summarize available information regarding different approaches to defining RLR and the methodology applied to the conduct of such reviews.

23 May 2022 in Vaccine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EBEkkehard Beck
Ekkehard Beck
EBEliana Biundo
Eliana Biundo
NDNancy Devlin
Nancy Devlin
MDMark T Doherty
Mark T Doherty
AGAntonio J García-Ruiz
Antonio J García-Ruiz
DSDavid Salisbury
David Salisbury
Vaccination provides significant health gains to individuals and society and can potentially improve health equity, healthcare systems and national economies. Policy decisions, however, are rarely informed by comprehensive economic evaluations (EE) including vaccination's wide-ranging value. The objective of this analysis was to focus on health technology assessment systems to identify relevant value concepts in order to improve current EE of non-pandemic vaccines. Following a literature review, a novel Value of Vaccination (VoV) framework was developed with experts in vaccine EE from developed countries with established health technology assessment systems. Forty-four studies presenting value frameworks or concepts applicable to vaccination were included. Eighteen unique value concepts relevant to EE were identified and defined. These were categorised within the VoV framework using three dimensions, moving from a narrow payer perspective to a more expansive and societal perspective. The dimensions were: (I) conventional payer perspective concepts (e.g., health gains in vaccinees, direct medical costs); (II) conventional societal perspective concepts (e.g., indirect health/economic gains to caregivers/households, productivity in vaccinees); and (III) novel societal concepts (e.g., financial risk protection, peace of mind, societal health gains, healthcare systems security, political stability, social equity and macroeconomic gains). While good quality evidence and methods are available to support concepts in Dimensions I and II, further work is needed to generate the required evidence for vaccination impact on Dimension III concepts. The devastating effect on nations of the COVID-19 pandemic has helped to highlight the potential far-reaching benefits that many vaccination programmes can offer. This VoV framework is particularly relevant to policy decisions considering EE, and the potential future expansion of non-pandemic vaccination value considerations. The framework helps to understand and compare current value considerations across countries and payer versus societal perspectives. It provides decision-makers with a transparent and logical path to broaden consideration of VoV in EE.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
BSBeata Smela
Beata Smela
MTMondher Toumi
Mondher Toumi
KŚKarolina Świerk
Karolina Świerk
KGKonrad Gawlik
Konrad Gawlik
ECEmilie Clay
Emilie Clay
LBLaurent Boyer
Laurent Boyer
Purpose: Nowadays, systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and meta-analyses are often placed at the top of the study hierarchy of evidence. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate the trends in SLRs of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) throughout the years.

1 May 2021 in Advances in Therapy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PWPiotr Wojciechowski
Piotr Wojciechowski
KWKoo Wilson
Koo Wilson
JNJameel Nazir
Jameel Nazir
IPIwona Pustułka
Iwona Pustułka
ATAnna Tytuła
Anna Tytuła
WJWojciech Jurczak
Wojciech Jurczak
Introduction A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of avatrombopag, relative to eltrombopag, romiplostim, and fostamatinib, for patients with chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) not responding adequately to corticosteroids. Methods A systematic search of publication and clinical trial databases was conducted to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Data from eligible studies were extracted and analyzed in a Bayesian framework using relative effect sizes vs placebo. Outcomes included durable platelet response; need for rescue therapy; reduction in use of concomitant ITP medication; incidence of any or World Health Organization (WHO) grade 2–4 bleeding events, and any adverse events. Results were reported as odds ratios or incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Results The NMA included seven phase 3 RCTs. Compared with placebo, avatrombopag was associated with statistically significant improvements in durable platelet response, reduction in use of concomitant ITP medication, and incidence of any bleeding events. Statistically significant differences vs placebo were also observed for durable platelet response and need for rescue therapy (eltrombopag, romiplostim, and fostamatinib); reduction in use of concomitant ITP medication (eltrombopag and romiplostim); incidence of any bleeding events (fostamatinib); and incidence of WHO grade 2–4 bleeding events (romiplostim and fostamatinib). No statistically significant differences were observed for any adverse events. Avatrombopag was associated with a statistically significant lower incidence of any bleeding events vs eltrombopag (IRR 0.38 [95% CrI 0.19, 0.75]) and romiplostim (IRR 0.38 [95% Crl 0.17, 0.86]); no other between-treatment differences were observed. Conclusion In this NMA, avatrombopag significantly increased the chance of achieving durable platelet response and reducing the use of concomitant ITP medication vs placebo, and significantly reduced the incidence of any bleeding events compared with placebo, eltrombopag, and romiplostim. The study aims to help guide clinicians managing patients with chronic ITP and insufficient response to previous treatment.

1 November 2021 in Respiratory Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
RKRobert Kemp
Robert Kemp
IPIwona Pustulka
Iwona Pustulka
GBGerhard Boerner
Gerhard Boerner
BSBeata Smela
Beata Smela
EHEmilie Hofstetter
Emilie Hofstetter
CFClément François
Clément François

23 November 2022 in Journal Of Nephrology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KFKerstin Folkerts
Kerstin Folkerts
AMAurelie Millier
Aurelie Millier
BSBeata Smela
Beata Smela
EOElzbieta Olewinska
Elzbieta Olewinska
NSNiklas Schmedt
Niklas Schmedt
CKCsaba P. Kovesdy
Csaba P. Kovesdy
Background: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) were shown to delay chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression in patients with hypertension and/or heart failure (HF) and proteinuria. Objective: We conducted a systematic literature review on real-world evidence to identify the literature gaps related to the efficacy and safety outcomes of MRAs administered to CKD patients. Results: A total of 751 records were identified of which, 23 studies (26 publications) were analyzed. Studies included heterogeneous populations, including the overall CKD, CKD and diabetes, CKD and HF, and CKD and a history of cardiovascular disease. Most of the studies were small and non-rigorous, resulting in a notable lack of evidence in these populations. In the overall CKD population, steroidal MRAs resulted in a significant or sustained eGFR reduction but no efficacy in delaying progression to end-stage kidney disease. No cardiovascular protection was found. Results for all-cause mortality and hospitalization for HF were inconsistent; however, the longest follow-up studies indicate similar or lower incidence for spironolactone non-users. Most results consistently reported a higher incidence of hyperkalemia among patients on steroidal MRAs in all CKD stages, and side effects led to high discontinuation rates in the real-world setting. Conclusions: Despite the limited availability of evidence on the effectiveness and safety of steroidal MRAs in CKD patients and subgroups with diabetes, HF or history of cardiovascular disease, MRAs were shown to have a limited effect on renal and cardiovascular outcomes. Gaps in the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of MRAs are particularly relevant in diabetic CKD patients; therefore, further research is warranted.