Anticoagulation Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Alzheimer’s Disease

Background and Purpose— Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are safer, at least equally efficacious, and cost-effective compared to warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but they remain underused, particularly in demented patients. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of DOACs compared with warfarin in patients with AF and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Methods— We constructed a microsimulation model to estimate the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation therapy (adjusted-dose warfarin and various DOACs) in 70-year-old patients with AF and AD from a US societal perspective. We stratified patient cohorts based on stage of AD and care setting. Model parameters were estimated from secondary sources. Health benefits were measured in the number of acute health events, life-years, and QALYs gained. We classified alternatives as cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained. Results— For patients with AF and AD, compared with warfarin, DOACs increase costs but also increase QALYs by reducing the risk of stroke. For mild-AD patients living in the community, edoxaban increased lifetime costs by $6603 and increased QALYs by 0.076 compared to warfarin, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $86 882/QALY gained. Even though DOACs increased QALYs compared with warfarin for all patient groups (ranging from 0.019 to 0.085 additional QALYs), no DOAC treatment alternative had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$150 000/QALY gained for patients with moderate to severe AD. For patients living in a long-term care facility with mild AD, the DOAC with the lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (rivaroxaban) costs $150 169 per QALY gained; for patients with more severe AD, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were higher. Conclusions— For patients with AF and mild AD living in the community, edoxaban is cost-effective compared with warfarin. Even though patients with moderate and severe AD living in the community and patients with any stage of AD living in a long-term care setting may obtain positive clinical benefits from anticoagulation treatment, DOACs are not cost-effective compared with warfarin for these populations. Compared to aspirin, no oral anticoagulation (warfarin or any DOAC) is cost effective in patients with AF and AD.

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness of prevention strategies for American tegumentary leishmaniasis in Argentina

Cadernos de Saúde Pública ◽

10.1590/0102-311x00172512 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 29 (12) ◽

pp. 2459-2472 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Pablo Wenceslao Orellano ◽

Nestor Vazquez ◽

Oscar Daniel Salomon

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Early Diagnosis ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Tegumentary Leishmaniasis ◽

Life Years ◽

The Cost

The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of reducing tegumentary leishmaniasis transmission using insecticide-impregnated clothing and curtains, and implementing training programs for early diagnosis. A societal perspective was adopted, with outcomes assessed in terms of costs per disability adjusted life years (DALY). Simulation was structured as a Markov model and costs were expressed in American dollars (US$). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of each strategy was calculated. One-way and multivariate sensitivity analyses were performed. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for early diagnosis strategy was estimated at US$ 156.46 per DALY averted, while that of prevention of transmission with insecticide-impregnated curtains and clothing was US$ 13,155.52 per DALY averted. Both strategies were more sensitive to the natural incidence of leishmaniasis, to the effectiveness of mucocutaneous leishmaniasis treatment and to the cost of each strategy. Prevention of vectorial transmission and early diagnosis have proved to be cost-effective measures.

Download Full-text

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Dabrafenib Plus Trametinib and Vemurafenib as First-Line Treatment in Patients with BRAF V600 Mutation-Positive Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma in China

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health ◽

10.3390/ijerph18126194 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (12) ◽

pp. 6194

Author(s):

Tianfu Gao ◽

Jia Liu ◽

Jing Wu

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

First Line ◽

Health States ◽

Life Years ◽

Braf V600 Mutation

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dabrafenib plus trametinib combination therapy versus vemurafenib as first-line treatment in patients with BRAF V600 mutation-positive unresectable or metastatic melanoma from a healthcare system perspective in China. Methods: This study employed a partitioned survival model with three health states (progression-free survival, post-progression survival and dead) to parameterize the data derived from Combi-v trial and extrapolated to 30 years. Health states’ utilities were measured by EQ-5D-3L, also sourced from the Combi-v trial. Costs including drug acquisition costs, disease management costs and adverse event costs were based on the Chinese Drug Bidding Database and physician survey in China. The primary outcomes of the model were lifetime costs, life-years (LYs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted, respectively. Result: Dabrafenib plus trametinib is projected to increase a patient’s life expectancy by 0.95 life-years over vemurafenib (3.03 vs. 2.08) and 1.09 QALY gains (2.48 vs. 1.39) with an incremental cost of $3833. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $3511 per QALY. In the probabilistic sensitivity analyses, at a threshold of $33,357 per QALY (three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China in 2020), the probability of dabrafenib plus trametinib being cost-effective was 90%. In the deterministic sensitivity analyses, the results were most sensitive to the dabrafenib plus trametinib drug costs, vemurafenib drug costs and discount rate of cost. Conclusion: Dabrafenib plus trametinib therapy yields more clinical benefits than vemurafenib. Using a threshold of $33,357 per QALY, dabrafenib plus trametinib is very cost-effective as compared with vemurafenib in China.

Download Full-text

Economic Evaluation of Posaconazole Versus Standard Azole Therapy as Prophylaxis against Invasive Fungal Infections in Patients with Prolonged Neutropenia in Canada

Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology ◽

10.1155/2012/583630 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 23 (2) ◽

pp. 59-64 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Amir A Tahami Monfared ◽

Amy K O’Sullivan ◽

Coleman Rotstein ◽

George Papadopoulos

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

High Risk ◽

Cost Saving ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Lifetime Horizon ◽

System Perspective ◽

Life Years ◽

Neutropenic Patients

INTRODUCTION: Posaconazole prophylaxis in high-risk neutropenic patients prevents invasive fungal infection (IFI). An economic model was used to assess the cost effectiveness of posaconazole from a Canadian health care system perspective.METHODS: A decision-analytic model was developed based on data from a randomized trial comparing posaconazole with standard azole (fluconazole or itraconazole) therapy. The model was extrapolated to a lifetime horizon using one-month Markov cycles; lifetime survival was specific to the underlying disease. Drug and treatment costs associated with IFI were estimated using published literature. The model was used to estimate total costs, IFIs avoided, life-years gained and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of posaconazole versus standard azole therapy, in 2007 Canadian dollars.RESULTS: Based on the clinical trial data, posaconazole was associated with fewer cases of IFI (0.05 versus 0.11; P=0.003), increased life-years (2.52 years versus 2.43 years) and slightly lower costs ($6,601 versus $7,045) per patient relative to standard azole therapy over a lifetime horizon. Higher acquisition costs for posaconazole were offset by IFI-associated inpatient costs for those prophylaxed with standard azoles. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 59% probability that posaconazole was cost-saving versus standard azole therapy and a 96% probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for posaconazole was at or below the $50,000 per life-year saved threshold.DISCUSSION: In Canada, posaconazole appears to be cost-saving relative to standard azole therapy in IFI prevention among high-risk neutropenic patients.

Download Full-text

Abstract 25: Cost-Effectiveness of Public Automated External Defibrillators

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.138.suppl_2.25 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 138 (Suppl_2) ◽

Author(s):

Lars W Andersen ◽

Mathias J Holmberg ◽

Asger Granfeldt ◽

Lyndon P James ◽

Lisa Caulley

Keyword(s):

Public Health ◽

Cardiac Arrest ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Automated External Defibrillators ◽

The Us ◽

Hospital Cardiac Arrest

Introduction: Despite a consistent association with improved outcomes, automated external defibrillators (AEDs) are used in only approximately 10% of public out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. One of the barriers towards increased use might be cost. The objective of this study was to provide a contemporary cost-effectiveness analysis on the use of public AEDs in the United States (US) to inform guidelines and public health initiatives. Methods: We compared the cost-effectiveness of public AEDs to no AEDs for out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in the US over a life-time horizon. The analysis assumed a societal perspective and results are presented as costs (in 2017 US dollars) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Model inputs were based on reviews of the literature. For the base case, we modelled an annual cardiac arrest incidence per AED of 20%. It was assumed that AED use was associated with a 52% relative increase in survival to hospital discharge with a favorable neurological outcome in those with a shockable rhythm. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to account for joint parameter uncertainty. Consistent with recent guidelines from the American Heart Association, we used a willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per QALY gained. Results: The no AED strategy resulted in 1.63 QALYs at a cost of $42,757. The AED strategy yielded an additional 0.26 QALYs for an incremental increase in cost of $13,793 per individual. The AED strategy yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $53,797 per QALY gained. The yearly incidence of cardiac arrests occurring in the presence of an AED had minimal effect on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio except at very low incidences. At an incidence of 1%, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $101,040 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses across a plausible range of health-care and societal estimates, the AED strategy remained cost-effective. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the AED strategy was cost-effective in 43%, 85%, and 91% of the scenarios at a threshold of $50,000, $100,000, and $150,000 per QALY gained, respectively. Conclusion: Public AEDs are a cost-effective public health intervention in the US. These findings support widespread dissemination of public AEDs.

Download Full-text

Cost-effectiveness of introducing cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the management of complex phalangeal fractures: economic simulation

MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY ◽

10.1007/s12306-020-00687-3 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

N. Faccioli ◽

E. Santi ◽

G. Foti ◽

G. Mansueto ◽

M. Corain

Keyword(s):

Computed Tomography ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Quality Adjusted Life Years ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Monetary Benefit ◽

Life Years ◽

Net Monetary Benefit ◽

Quality Adjusted Life

Abstract Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of introducing cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) in the management of the complex finger fractures with articular involvement. Methods We created a decision tree model simulating the diagnostic pathway of complex finger fractures, suggesting the use of CBCT as alternative to multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT), and we compared their clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness for a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients. Measures of effectiveness are analysed by using quality-adjusted life years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, and net monetary benefit. Results Diagnosis of a complex finger fracture performed with CBCT costed 67.33€ per patient, yielded 9.08 quality-adjusted life years, and gained an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 29.94€ and a net monetary benefit of 9.07 € at 30,000€ threshold. Using MSCT for diagnosis costed 106.23 €, yielded 8.18 quality-adjusted life years, and gained an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 371.15 € and a net monetary benefit of 8.09 €. CBCT strategy dominated the MSCT strategy. The acceptability curve shows that there is 98% probability of CBCT being the optimal strategy at 30,000€ threshold (1 EUR equal to 1.11 USD; updated on 02/02/2020). Conclusion CBCT in complex finger fractures management is cost saving compared with MSCT and may be considered a valuable imaging tool in preoperative assessment, allowing early detection and appropriate treatment. It shortens the time to completion of diagnostic work-up, reduces the number of additional diagnostic procedures, improves quality of life, and may reduce costs in a societal perspective.

Download Full-text

Comparative clinical effects and cost–effectiveness of maximum androgen blockade, docetaxel with androgen deprivation therapy and ADT alone for the treatment of mHSPC in China

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research ◽

10.2217/cer-2018-0133 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (11) ◽

pp. 865-877 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Maobai Liu ◽

Shuli Qu ◽

Yanjun Liu ◽

Xingxing Yao ◽

Wei Jiang

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Androgen Deprivation Therapy ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Quality Adjusted Life Year ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Clinical Effects ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Quality Adjusted Life ◽

Androgen Blockade

Aim: To compare the clinical effects and cost–effectiveness of maximum androgen blockade (MAB), docetaxel to androgen deprivation therapy (Doc-ADT) and ADT alone for the treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer in China. Methods: A network meta-analysis and a Markov model were adopted for effectiveness and economic evaluation. Results: The hazard ratios of overall survival and progression-free survival were 0.782 and 0.628 for Doc-ADT versus ADT alone; 0.897 and 0.824 for MAB versus ADT alone. Doc-ADT was cost-effective compared with MAB and ADT alone, with an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of CNY 96,848 and CNY 67,758 per quality-adjusted life year, respectively. MAB was cost-effective compared with ADT alone, with an incremental cost–effectiveness ratio of CNY 137,487 per quality-adjusted life year. Conclusion: Doc-ADT is likely the optimal option from the perspective of both clinical outcomes and economic considerations.

Download Full-text

Societal and Economic Effect of Meniscus Scaffold Procedures for Irreparable Meniscus Injuries

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546516639290 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 44 (7) ◽

pp. 1724-1734 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Jan J. Rongen ◽

Tim M. Govers ◽

Pieter Buma ◽

Janneke P.C. Grutters ◽

Gerjon Hannink

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Willingness To Pay ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Medial Meniscus ◽

Relative Risk Reduction ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

The Cost ◽

Meniscus Scaffolds

Background: Meniscus scaffolds are currently evaluated clinically for their efficacy in preventing the development of osteoarthritis as well as for their efficacy in treating patients with chronic symptoms. Procedural costs, therapeutic consequences, clinical efficacy, and future events should all be considered to maximize the monetary value of this intervention. Purpose: To examine the socioeconomic effect of treating patients with irreparable medial meniscus injuries with a meniscus scaffold. Study Design: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Two Markov simulation models for patients with an irreparable medial meniscus injury were developed. Model 1 was used to investigate the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a meniscus scaffold compared with standard partial meniscectomy by the possibility of preventing the development of osteoarthritis. Model 2 was used to investigate the short-term (5-year) cost-effectiveness of a meniscus scaffold compared with standard partial meniscectomy by alleviating clinical symptoms, specifically in chronic patients with previous meniscus surgery. For both models, probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations were applied. Treatment effectiveness was expressed as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), while costs (estimated in euros) were assessed from a societal perspective. We assumed €20,000 as a reference value for the willingness to pay per QALY. Next, comprehensive sensitivity analyses were performed to identify the most influential variables on the cost-effectiveness of meniscus scaffolds. Results: Model 1 demonstrated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a meniscus scaffold treatment of €54,463 per QALY (€5991/0.112). A threshold analysis demonstrated that a meniscus scaffold should offer a relative risk reduction of at least 0.34 to become cost-effective, assuming a willingness to pay of €20,000. Decreasing the costs of the meniscus scaffold procedure by 33% (€10,160 instead of €15,233; an absolute change of €5073) resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €7876 per QALY. Model 2 demonstrated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of a meniscus scaffold treatment of €297,727 per QALY (€9825/0.033). On the basis of the current efficacy data, a meniscus scaffold provides a relative risk reduction of “limited benefit” postoperatively of 0.37 compared with standard treatment. A threshold analysis revealed that assuming a willingness to pay of €20,000, a meniscus scaffold would not be cost-effective within a period of 5 years. Most influential variables on the cost-effectiveness of meniscus scaffolds were the cost of the scaffold procedure, cost associated with osteoarthritis, and quality of life before and after the scaffold procedure. Conclusion: Results of the current health technology assessment emphasize that the monetary value of meniscus scaffold procedures is very much dependent on a number of influential variables. Therefore, before implementing the technology in the health care system, it is important to critically assess these variables in a relevant context. The models can be improved as additional clinical data regarding the efficacy of the meniscus scaffold become available.

Download Full-text

Economic Evaluation of CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Antiplatelet Therapy Compared to Universal use of Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel in Qatar

University of the Future: Re-Imagining Research and Higher Education ◽

10.29117/quarfe.2020.0170 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Sawsan Ibrahim AlMukdad ◽

Hazem Elewa ◽

Daoud Al-Badriyeh

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Antiplatelet Therapy ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Cyp2c19 Genotype ◽

Life Years ◽

One Year ◽

The One ◽

Guided Therapy

Background: Patients having CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles and receiving clopidogrel are at higher risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Ticagrelor is a more effective and expensive antiplatelet that is unaffected by the CYP2C19 polymorphism. The main aim of the current research is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness among CYP2C19 genotype-guided therapy, universal ticagrelor, and universal clopidogrel after a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: A two-part simulation model, including a one-year decision-analytic model and a 20-year followup Markov model, was created to follow the use of (i) universal clopidogrel, (ii) universal ticagrelor, and (iii) genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy. Outcome measures were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, cost/success) and incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR, cost/qualityadjusted life years [QALY]). Therapy success was defined as survival without myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis, and no therapy discontinuation because of adverse events, i.e. major bleeding and dyspnea. The model was based on a multivariate analysis, and a sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model outcomes. Results: Against universal clopidogrel, genotype-guided therapy was cost-effective over the one-year duration (ICER, USD 6,102 /success), and dominant over the long-term. Genotype-guided therapy was dominant over universal ticagrelor over the one-year duration and cost-effective over the long term (ICUR, USD 1,383 /QALY). Universal clopidogrel was dominant over ticagrelor over the short term, and cost-effective over the long-term (ICUR, 10,616 /QALY). Conclusion: CYP2C19 genotype-guided therapy appears to be the preferred antiplatelet strategy, followed by universal clopidogrel, and then universal ticagrelor for post-PCI patients in Qatar.

Download Full-text

ANALISIS EFEKTIVITAS BIAYA PADA PASIEN ANAK DEMAM TIFOID DI RUMAH SAKIT BHAYANGKARA MANADO

PHARMACON ◽

10.35799/pha.8.2019.29299 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 335

Author(s):

Agatha Agnes ◽

Gayatri Citraningtyas ◽

Sri Sudewi

Keyword(s):

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Typhoid Fever ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Pediatric Patients ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Cost Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Effectiveness Analysis ◽

Record Data

ABSTRACT Typhoid fever is an endemic disease which it incidence rate is still high in Indonesian. Administering antibiotic therapy can do treatment of typhoid fever. This study was conducted since there are several pediatric patients diagnosed with typhoid fever but have different antibiotic therapies, namely cefotaxime and ceftriaxone therapy, so it is necessary to do calculations to determine the comparison and determine which treatment is more efficient in cost and effectiveness. The method used in this study is CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) with the design of retrieving medical record data of children with typhoid fever in Bhayangkara Manado Hospital retrospectively from January to December 2018. The samples obtained were 28 pediatric patients, cinsisting of 12 patients using cefotaxime therapy and 16 patients using ceftriaxone therapy. The result of ACER (An Avarage Cost Effective Ratio) obtained by ceftriaxone were Rp. 526.609,-/day and cefotaxime Rp. 484.789,-/day. In this study, if patients under cefotaxime therapy want to swich treatment to ceftriaxone therapy, ICER calculation (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio) is carried out the result are Rp.340.528,-. Keyword: Typhoid fever, Antibiotics, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) ABSTRAK Demam tifoid merupakan penyakit endemik yang angka kejadiannya masih tinggi di Indonesia. Pengobatan demam tifoid dapat diobati dengan cara pemberian terapi antibiotik. Penelitian ini dilakukan karena ada beberapa pasien anak yang di diagnosa demam tifoid tetapi memiliki terapi antibiotik yang berbeda, yaitu terapi sefotaksim dan seftriakson sehingga perlu dilakukan perhitungan untuk mengetahui perbandingan dan menentukan pemilihan pengobatan mana yang lebih efisien dalam biaya maupun efektivitas. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis) dengan rancangan pengambilan data rekam medik pasien anak demam tifoid di RS. Bhayangkara Manado secara retrospektif pada periode Januari – Desember 2018. Sampel yang didapat sebanyak 28 pasien anak, yang terdiri dari 12 pasien pengguna terapi sefotaksim dan 16 pasien pengguna terapi seftriakson. Hasil ACER (An Avarage Cost Effective Ratio) yang diperoleh sefotaksim Rp.526.609,-/hari dan seftriakson Rp.484.789,-/hari. Pada penelitian ini jika pasien terapi sefotaksim ingin berpindah pengobatan ke terapi seftriakson maka dilakukan perhitungan ICER (Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio) dan didapat hasil Rp.340.582,-, sehingga jika ingin berpindah pengobatan maka perlu penambahan biaya sesuai nilaI ICER.Kata Kunci : Demam Tifoid, Antibiotik, CEA (Cost-Effectiveness Analysis).

Download Full-text

Economic evaluation of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

10.21203/rs.3.rs-21177/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Haiqiang SANG ◽

Yaohui JIANG ◽

Zhe WANG ◽

Rujie ZHENG

Keyword(s):

Heart Failure ◽

Sensitivity Analysis ◽

Cost Effectiveness ◽

Ejection Fraction ◽

Incremental Cost ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Cost Effectiveness Ratio ◽

Reduced Ejection Fraction ◽

The Cost

Abstract Background: In 2020, sacubitril/valsartan(formerly LCZ696) will implement the new negotiated price of medical insurance in China, and the cost of treatment will be significantly reduced. The aim of study is to evaluate the economy of sacubitril/valsartan(SAC/VAL) compared with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) (enalapril) in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in China.Method: A Markov model was developed to project clinical and economic outcomes of SAC/VAL versus enalapril for 64-year-old patients with HFrEF over 10 years from the Chinese medical and health system perspective. A cost-utility analysis was performed mostly based on data from the PARADIGM trial. Other transition probability, costs, and utilities were obtained from published literature and public databases. The primary outcome were total and incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for SAC/VAL relative to enalapril. The model was verified the uncertainty using the sensitivity analysis furtherly.Results: Compared with enalapril, SAC/VAL cost more than enalapril (¥96532 vs. ¥34560) and was more cost-effective (4.6 QALYs vs. 4.3 QALYs), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of ¥185720 per QALY gained for patients with HFrEF at a WTP threshold of ¥212676 per QALY. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the model, identifying the death on the SAC/VAL group as a significant drivers of the cost-effectiveness. At the national negotiation price (¥9.95 per 100mg), probability of SAC/VAL being cost-effective was about 53% at a WTP threshold of ¥212676 per QALY.Conclusion: SAC/VAL was associated with clinical benefit and may be cost-effective compared with an ACEI (the current standard of care) in patients with HFrEF.

Download Full-text