Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation: A Canadian payer perspective

2011 ◽  
Vol 105 (05) ◽  
pp. 908-919 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anuraag Kansal ◽  
Stuart Connolly ◽  
Siyang Peng ◽  
John Linnehan ◽  
Carole Bradley-Kennedy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Real World ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Dabigatran Etexilate ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Systemic Embolism ◽  
Clinical Events ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years

SummaryOral dabigatran etexilate is indicated for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in whom anticoagulation is appropriate. Based on the RE-LY study we investigated the cost-effectiveness of Health Canada approved dabigatran etexilate dosing (150 mg bid for patients <80 years, 110 mg bid for patients ≥80 years) versus warfarin and “real-world” prescribing (i.e. warfarin, aspirin, or no treatment in a cohort of warfarin-eligible patients) from a Canadian payer perspective. A Markov model simulated AF patients at moderate to high risk of stroke while tracking clinical events [primary and recurrent ischaemic strokes, systemic embolism, transient ischaemic attack, haemorrhage (intracranial, extracranial, and minor), acute myocardial infarction and death] and resulting functional disability. Acute event costs and resulting long-term follow-up costs incurred by disabled stroke survivors were based on a Canadian prospective study, published literature, and national statistics. Clinical events, summarized as events per 100 patient-years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. Over a lifetime, dabigatran etexilate treated patients experienced fewer intracranial haemorrhages (0.49 dabigatran etexilate vs. 1.13 warfarin vs. 1.05 “real-world” prescribing) and fewer ischaemic strokes (4.40 dabigatran etexilate vs. 4.66 warfarin vs. 5.16 “real-world” prescribing) per 100 patient-years. The ICER of dabigatran etexilate was $10,440/QALY versus warfarin and $3,962/QALY versus “real-world” prescribing. This study demonstrates that dabigatran etexilate is a highly cost-effective alternative to current care for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism among Canadian AF patients.

scholarly journals Predicting Cost-Effectiveness of Generic Versus Brand Dabigatran Using Pharmacometric Estimates among Patients with Atrial Fibrillation in the United States

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ching-Yu Wang ◽  
Phuong N. Pham ◽  
Sarah Kim ◽  
Karthik Lingineni ◽  
Stephan Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Lifetime Cost ◽  
Systemic Exposure ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The United States ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Generic Medications ◽  
Newer Anticoagulants

ABSTRACTGeneric entry of newer anticoagulants is expected to decrease the costs of atrial fibrillation management. However, when making switches between brand and generic medications, bioequivalence failures are possible. The objectives of this study were to predict and compare the lifetime cost-effectiveness of brand dabigatran with hypothetical future generics. Markov micro-simulations were modified to predict the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years of patients on either brand or generic dabigatran from a U.S. private payer perspective. Event rates for generics were predicted using previously developed pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. The analyses showed that generic dabigatran with lower-than-brand systemic exposure was dominant. Meanwhile, generic dabigatran with extremely high systemic exposure was not cost-effective compared to the brand reference. Cost-effectiveness of generic medications cannot always be assumed as shown in this example. Combined use of pharmacometric and pharmacoeconomic models can assist in decision making between brand and generic pharmacotherapies.

Dabigatran versus rivaroxaban for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation in Canada

2012 ◽  
Vol 108 (10) ◽  
pp. 672-682 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Sharma ◽  
Carole Bradley-Kennedy ◽  
Andreas Clemens ◽  
Brigitta U. Monz ◽  
Siyang Peng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Dabigatran Etexilate ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Clinical Event ◽  
Systemic Embolism ◽  
Lifetime Horizon ◽  
Treatment Comparison ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Event Rates

SummaryCanadian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in whom anticoagulation is appropriate have two new choices for anticoagulation for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism – dabigatran etexilate (dabigatran) and rivaroxaban. Based on the RE-LY and ROCKET AF trial results, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran (twice daily dosing of 150 mg or 110 mg based on patient age) versus rivaroxaban from a Canadian payer perspective. A formal indirect treatment comparison (ITC) of dabigatran versus rivaroxaban was performed, using dabigatran clinical event rates from RE-LY for the safety-on-treatment population, adjusted to the ROCKET AF population. A previously described Markov model was modified to simulate anticoagulation treatment using ITC results as inputs. Model outputs included total costs, event rates, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The ITC found when compared to rivaroxaban, dabigatran had a lower risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) (relative risk [RR] = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.21 –0.67) and stroke (RR = 0.62; 95%CI 0.45–0.87). Over a lifetime horizon, the model found dabigatran-treated patients experienced fewer ICHs (0.33 dabigatran vs. 0.71 rivaroxaban) and ischaemic strokes (3.40 vs. 3.96) per 100 patient-years, and accrued more QALYs (6.17 vs. 6.01). Dabigatran-treated patients had lower acute care and long-term follow-up costs per patient ($52,314 vs. $53,638) which more than offset differences in drug costs ($7,299 vs. $6,128). In probabilistic analysis, dabigatran had high probability of being the most cost-effective therapy at common thresholds of willingness-to-pay (93% at a $20,000/QALY threshold). This study found dabigatran is economically dominant versus rivaroxaban for prevention of stroke and systemic embolism among Canadian AF patients.

scholarly journals First-Line Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab versus Sorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 931
Author(s):  
Chi-Leung Chiang ◽  
Sik-Kwan Chan ◽  
Shing-Fung Lee ◽  
Horace Cheuk-Wai Choi
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Lifetime Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Using Data

Background: The IMbrave 150 trial revealed that atezolizumab plus bevacizumab (atezo–bev) improves survival in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (1 year survival rate: 67.2% vs. 54.6%). We assessed the cost-effectiveness of atezo–bev vs. sorafenib as first-line therapy in patients with unresectable HCC from the US payer perspective. Methods: Using data from the IMbrave 150, we developed a Markov model to compare the lifetime cost and efficacy of atezo–bev as first-line systemic therapy in HCC with those of sorafenib. The main outcomes were life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Atezo–bev demonstrated a gain of 0.44 QALYs, with an additional cost of USD 79,074. The ICER of atezo–bev was USD 179,729 per QALY when compared with sorafenib. The model was most sensitive to the overall survival hazard ratio and body weight. If we assumed that all patients at the end of the IMbrave 150 trial were cured of HCC, atezo–bev was cost-effective (ICER USD 53,854 per QALY). However, if all patients followed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data, the ICER of atezo–bev was USD 385,857 per QALY. Reducing the price of atezo–bev by 20% and 29% would satisfy the USD 150,000/QALY and 100,000/QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. Moreover, capping the duration of therapy to ≤12 months or reducing the dosage of bev to ≤10 mg/kg would render atezo–bev cost-effective. Conclusions: The long-term effectiveness of atezo–bev is a critical but uncertain determinant of its cost-effectiveness. Price reduction would favorably influence cost-effectiveness, even if long-term clinical outcomes were modest. Further studies to optimize the duration and dosage of therapy are warranted.

Cost-effectiveness of mobile health-based integrated care for atrial fibrillation: Model development and data analysis (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xueyan Luo ◽  
Wei Xu ◽  
Quan Yuan ◽  
Han Lai ◽  
Chunji Huang
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Integrated Care ◽  
Mobile Health ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Base Case ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Mhealth Technology

BACKGROUND Mobile health (mhealth) technology is increasingly used in disease management. Using mhealth tools to integrate and streamline care was found to improve atrial fibrillation (AF) patients’ clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to investigate the potential clinical and health economic outcomes of mhealth-based integrated care for AF from the perspective of a public healthcare provider in China. METHODS A Markov model was designed to compare outcomes of mhealth-based care and usual care in a hypothetical cohort of AF patients in China. The time horizon was 30 years with monthly cycles. Model outcomes measured were direct medical cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the robustness of base-case results. RESULTS In the base-case analysis, mhealth-based care gained higher QALYs of 0.0818 with an incurred cost of USD1,778. Using USD33,438 per QALY (three times gross domestic product) as the willingness-to-pay threshold, mhealth-based care was cost-effective, with an ICER of USD21,739 per QALY. The one-way sensitivity analysis found compliance to mhealth-based care had the greatest impact on the ICER. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, mhealth-based care was accepted as cost-effective in 80.91% of 10,000 iterations. CONCLUSIONS This study suggested that the use of mhealth technology in streamlining and integrating care for AF patients was cost-effective in China.

Abstract W P273: The Cost-Effectiveness of Telestroke Varies by Implementation Cost and Stroke Severity: Real World Data From a Pacific Northwest Network

Stroke ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 46 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Baraban ◽  
Richard Nelson ◽  
Alexandra Lesko ◽  
Jennifer Majersik ◽  
Archit Bhatt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Pacific Northwest ◽  
Real World ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Stroke Severity ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Implementation Costs ◽  
The Cost

Objective: An obstacle for community hospitals in joining a telestroke network is often the cost of implementation. Yet, previous analyses examining the cost and cost-effectiveness have only used estimates from the literature. Using real-world data from a Pacific Northwest telestroke network, we examined the cost-effectiveness of telestroke for spokes by level of financial responsibility for these costs and how this changes with patient stroke severity. Methods: We constructed a decision analytic model and parameterized it using patient-level clinical and financial data from the Providence Telestroke Network (PTN) pre and post telestroke implementation. Data included patients presenting at 17 spokes within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Probability inputs included observed IV-tPA treatment rates, transfer status and hospital costs and reimbursements. Effectiveness, measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and cost per patient were used to calculate incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs). ICER’s of <$50,000-$120,000/QALY are considered cost-effective. Outcomes were generated overall and separately by admit NIHSS, defined as low (0-10), medium (11-20) and high (>20) and percentage of implementation costs paid by spokes (0%, 50%, 100%). Results: Data for 594 patients, 105 pre- and 489 post-implementation, were included. See Table 1. Conclusions: Our results support previous theoretic models showing good value, overall. However, costs and ICERs varied by stroke severity, with telestroke being most cost-effective for severe strokes. Telestroke was least cost effective if spokes paid for half or more of implementation costs.

scholarly journals Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Vs. Vitamin K Antagonists in the Elderly With Atrial Fibrillation: Insights From the Evidence in a Real-World Setting

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yue Wu ◽  
Chi Zhang ◽  
Zhi-Chun Gu
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Strategy ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Direct Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Cost

Background: In the clinical setting, the economic benefits of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) remain unclear. This study aimed to estimate and compare the cost-effectiveness of DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs; warfarin) in preventing stroke among AF patients aged &gt;75 years in real-world practice.Methods: A Markov model with a 10-year span was constructed to estimate the long-term clinical and economic outcomes among AF patients aged &gt;75 years treated with DOACs and warfarin. The study was populated with a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 AF patients aged &gt;75 years. Probabilities of clinical outcomes were obtained from the pooled observational studies (OSs), comparing DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) with VKAs. Other model inputs, including the utilities and the costs, were all estimated from public sources and the published literature. The costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QAYLs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were estimated for each treatment strategy. Subgroup analyses of individual DOACs and the scenario analysis were performed. Uncertainty was evaluated by deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).Results: Compared to warfarin, DOACs were associated with a gain of 0.36 QALY at an additional cost of $15,234.65, resulting in an ICER of $42,318.47 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the ICER was sensitive to the cost of DOACs. Direct oral anticoagulants also shifted from dominating to dominated status When their annual costs of DOACs were over $3,802.84 or the risk ratio of death compared to warfarin was over 1.077%/year. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) suggested that DOACs had a 53.83 and 90.7% probability of being cost-effective when the willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $50,000 and $100,000, respectively. Among all the four individual DOACs, edoxaban treatment was revealed as the preferred treatment strategy for the AF patients aged over 75 years by yielding the most significant health gain with the relatively low total cost.Conclusions: Despite the high risk for major bleeding in elderly patients with AF, DOACs are more cost-effective treatment options than warfarin in real-world practice. Edoxaban was the preferred treatment strategy among four kinds of DOACs for AF patients aged over 75 years. Furthermore, beyond their safety profiles, the treatment benefits of DOACs assumed greater relevance and importance in older adults.

Cost-effectiveness for metastatic colorectal cancer.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15003-e15003
Author(s):  
Linli Yao ◽  
Jiaqi Han ◽  
Longjiang She ◽  
Dong Ding ◽  
Mengting Liao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Third ◽  
Scenario Analyses ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Third Line ◽  
The Cost

e15003 Background: As standard third-line treatments for metastatic colorectal cancer, regorafenib and fruquintinib, compared with placebo, increase median overall survival by 2.5 months and 2.7 months, respectively. Given the incremental clinical benefit, we aim to estimate the cost effectiveness of regorafenib versus fruquintinib in the third-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer from Chinese payer perspective. Methods: A mathematical Markov model was established to project the cost-effectiveness of regorafenib versus fruquintinib from the CONCUR and FRESCO clinical trials. Quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs) were analyzed with extracted data from the trials. Willingness to pay (WTP) of $26508 was used. Drug costs were estimated from the perspectives of the health care system in the People’s Republic of China. One way sensitivity and scenario analyses were performed by varying potentially modifiable parameters of the model. Results: Fruquintinib, compared with regorafenib, provided an additional 0.028 QALYs (0.274 QALYs versus 0.246 QALYs) at less cost ($33536 versus $35607). Conclusions: Fruquintinib is more cost-effective than regorafenib as the third-line management for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer when WTP is $26508.

Cost-effectiveness of nodal observation versus completion lymphadenectomy in patients with melanoma and sentinel lymph node metastases.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22076-e22076
Author(s):  
Elena Parvez ◽  
Teodora Dumitra ◽  
Dimitra Panagiotoglou ◽  
Sarkis H. Meterissian ◽  
Sinziana Dumitra
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Transition Probabilities ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Health State ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Disease States ◽  
Payer Perspective ◽  
Life Years

e22076 Background: The MSLT-II trial demonstrated no survival benefit of completion lymphadenectomy (CLND) compared to nodal observation (NO) and subsequent therapeutic lymphadenectomy (TLND) in the case of macroscopic nodal relapse in patients with melanoma and SLN metastases. NO avoids the upfront cost and morbidity of CLND. However, patients followed with NO must undergo intensive surveillance and if TLND is required, it is associated with a higher complication rate than CLND. The cost-effectiveness of NO versus CLND in light of data from MSLT-II has not been previously studied. Methods: A Markov model with a 10-year time horizon was constructed to simulate two hypothetical cohorts of patients with SLN metastases undergoing NO and subsequent TLND for nodal recurrence or upfront CLND. Transition probabilities between disease states were derived from the MSLT-II trial. Remaining parameters including complication rates and health state utilities were obtained from an extensive review of the literature. Direct health care system costs were obtained from published US Medicare cost data and the literature. Primary outcomes were cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to compare treatment strategies. Sensitivity analysis was performed in order to evaluate model uncertainty. A threshold of acceptance of $100,000/QALY was used. Results: Total projected cost over the study period for CLND was $28,609.87, while that of NO was lower at $20,865.27, resulting in $7,744.60 saved for the NO treatment strategy. Ten-year utility was 4.840 for CLND compared to 5.379 for NO, resulting in a gain of 0.539 QALYs in the NO arm. The NO strategy is dominant in the model as it results in both cost-savings and a gain in health effects, with an average ICER of -$14,368.46/QALY gained. Conclusions: From the payer perspective, the strategy of NO compared to CLND in patients with melanoma and SLN metastases is associated with an improvement in health outcomes and reduction in cost. Taking into account MSLT-II trial data, this study demonstrates NO is more cost-effective than CLND.

scholarly journals Cost and cost-effectiveness of a real-world HCV treatment program among HIV-infected individuals in Myanmar

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e004181
Author(s):  
Lara K Marquez ◽  
Antoine Chaillon ◽  
Kyi Pyar Soe ◽  
Derek C Johnson ◽  
Jean-Marc Zosso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Treatment Outcomes ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Protocol ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Treatment Programme ◽  
Hcv Treatment ◽  
Potential Cost ◽  
Life Years

IntroductionOver half of those hepatitis C virus (HCV)/HIV coinfected live in low-income and middle-income countries, and many remain undiagnosed or untreated. In 2016, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) established a direct-acting antiviral (DAA) treatment programme for people HCV/HIV coinfected in Myanmar. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the real-world cost and cost-effectiveness of this programme, and potential cost-effectiveness if implemented by the Ministry of Health (MoH).MethodsCosts (patient-level microcosting) and treatment outcomes were collected from the MSF prospective cohort study in Dawei, Myanmar. A Markov model was used to assess cost-effectiveness of the programme compared with no HCV treatment from a health provider perspective. Estimated lifetime and healthcare costs (in 2017 US$) and health outcomes (in disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs)) were simulated to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), compared with a willingness-to-pay threshold of per capita Gross Domestic Product in Myanmar ($1250). We evaluated cost-effectiveness with updated quality-assured generic DAA prices and potential cost-effectiveness of a proposed simplified treatment protocol with updated DAA prices if implemented by the MoH.ResultsFrom November 2016 to October 2017, 122 with HIV/HCV-coinfected patients were treated with DAAs (46% with cirrhosis), 96% (n=117) achieved sustained virological response. Mean treatment costs were $1229 (without cirrhosis) and $1971 (with cirrhosis), with DAA drugs being the largest contributor to cost. Compared with no treatment, the program was cost-effective (ICER $634/DALY averted); more so with updated prices for quality-assured generic DAAs (ICER $488/DALY averted). A simplified treatment protocol delivered by the MoH could be cost-effective if associated with similar outcomes (ICER $316/DALY averted).ConclusionsUsing MSF programme data, the DAA treatment programme for HCV among HIV-coinfected individuals is cost-effective in Myanmar, and even more so with updated DAA prices. A simplified treatment protocol could enhance cost-effectiveness if further rollout demonstrates it is not associated with worse treatment outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document