OBJECTIVES: To conduct a literature review to identify cost-effective analysis (CEA) studies for the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the United States (US). METHODS: A total of four databases were searched to identify articles relevant to CEA of pharmacological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: (1) Embase; (2) Medline; (3) Tufts CEA registry; and (4) The UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Database; from inception to November 5, 2016. Key search terms included “rheumatoid arthritis” and “cost” or “cost-effectiveness”. English, peer-reviewed studies from the US perspective that reported original CEA’s were included. RESULTS: The search identified a total of 2,882 articles. After the removal of duplicates and title screening, 110 articles remained for full-text review. A total of 11 articles were included in the review. These articles were assessed for quality according to the CHEERS checklist and had scores ranging from 11/24 (46%) to 18/24 (75%). The pharmacological agents most commonly reported in the articles were: methotrexate (n=7), etanercept (n=7), and adalimumab (n=5). The model types of the articles were decision models (n=5), Markov models (n=2), Monte-Carlo simulations (n=2), and individual patient simulations (n=2). The time horizons ranged from 6 months to lifetime, and generally performed discounting at a rate of 3%. The perspectives of the studies were either payer (n=7), societal (n=3), or both (n=1). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio values reported in the studies ranged from a low of $4,849/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) to a high of $12.5 million/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there were a total of 11 articles that presented CEA of various pharmacological treatment options for RA in the US. However, since some drugs were analyzed less frequently than others, and they were not all compared against each other, it was not possible to state which was the most cost-effective option overall.