Cost-effectiveness analysis of rivaroxaban for treatment and secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism in the Netherlands

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of MammaPrint® to Guide the Use of Endocrine Therapy in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Gene expression profiling tests can predict the risk of disease recurrence and select patients who are expected to benefit from therapy, while allowing other patients to forgo therapy. For breast cancers, these tests were initially designed to tailor chemotherapy decisions, but recent evidence suggests that they may also guide the use of endocrine therapy. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of a prognostic test, MammaPrint^®, to guide the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy in patients eligible according to Dutch treatment guidelines.

METHODS

We constructed a Markov decision model to calculate the lifetime costs (in 2020 Euros) and effects (survival and quality-adjusted life-years) of MammaPrint^® testing versus usual care (endocrine therapy for all patients) in a simulated cohort of patients. The population of interest includes patients for whom MammaPrint^® testing is currently not indicated, but for whom it may be possible to safely omit endocrine therapy. We applied both a health care perspective and a societal perspective and discounted costs (4%) and effects (1.5%). Model inputs were obtained from published research (including randomized controlled trials), nationwide cancer registry data, cohort data and publicly available data sources. Scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the impact of uncertainty around input parameters. Additionally, threshold analyses were performed to identify under which circumstances MammaPrint^® testing would be cost effective.

RESULTS

Adjuvant endocrine therapy guided by MammaPrint^® resulted in fewer side effects, more (quality-adjusted) life-years (0.10 and 0.07 incremental QALYS and LYs, respectively) and higher costs (€18,323 incremental costs) compared with the usual care strategy in which all patients receive endocrine therapy. While costs for hospital visits, medication costs and productivity costs were somewhat higher in the usual care strategy, these did not outweigh costs of testing in the MammaPrint^® strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €185,644 per QALY gained from a healthcare perspective and €180,617 from a societal perspective. Sensitivity and scenario analyses showed that the conclusions remained the same under changed input parameters and assumptions. Our results show that MammaPrint^® can become a cost-effective strategy when either the price of the test is reduced (> 50%), or the proportion of patients for which treatment is altered (i.e. those with ultra-low risk) increases to > 26%.

CONCLUSION

Standard MammaPrint^® testing to guide the use of endocrine therapy in our simulated patient population appears not to be a cost-effective strategy compared with usual care. The cost effectiveness of the test can be improved by reducing the price or preselecting a population more likely to benefit from the test.

Economic Evaluation of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Compared to Warfarin for Venous Thromboembolism in Thailand: A Cost-Utility Analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been used for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Thailand. However, they have not been listed in the National List of Essential Medicines (NLEM). A cost-effectiveness analysis is needed to aid policymakers in deciding whether DOACs should be listed in the NLEM. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of DOACs for patients with VTE in Thailand.

METHODS

A cohort-based state transition model was constructed from a societal perspective with a lifetime horizon. All available DOACs, including apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran, were compared with warfarin. A 6-month cycle length was used to capture all costs and health outcomes. The model consisted of nine health states, including VTE on treatment, VTE off treatment, recurrent VTE, clinically relevant non-major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, post-intracranial bleeding, chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, and death. All inputs were based on a comprehensive literature review. The model outcomes included total cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) with a 3% annual discount rate. A fully incremental cost-effectiveness analysis and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained were calculated at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of THB 160,000/QALY ($5003). The robustness of the findings was assessed using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

All DOACs were associated with a decreased risk of VTE recurrence and intracranial hemorrhage. In the base-case analysis, apixaban could increase 0.16 QALYs compared with warfarin. An ICER for apixaban was 269,809 Thai baht (THB)/QALY ($8437/QALY). Rivaroxaban had a better QALY than warfarin at 0.09 QALYs with an ICER of 757,363 THB/QALY ($23,682/QALY). Edoxaban and dabigatran could also increase by 0.10 QALYs with an ICER of 709,945 THB ($22,200) and 707,145 THB ($22,122)/QALY, respectively. Our probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that warfarin had a 99.8% possibility of being cost-effective, while apixaban had a 0.2% possibility of being cost-effective at the current WTP. Other DOACs had no possibility of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

All DOACs were not cost-effective for VTE treatment at the current WTP in Thailand. Apixaban is likely to be the best option among DOACs.

Cost-of-Illness Analysis of Long-Term Health Care Resource Use and Disease Burden in Patients With Pulmonary Embolism: Insights From the PREFER in VTE Registry

Background As mortality from pulmonary embolism (PE) decreases, the personal and societal costs among survivors are receiving increasing attention. Detailing this burden would support an efficient public health resource allocation. We aimed to provide estimates for the economic and disease burden of PE also accounting for long-term health care use and both direct and indirect costs beyond the acute phase. Methods and Results This is a cost-of-illness analysis with a bottom-up approach based on data from the PREFER in VTE registry (Prevention of Thromboembolic Events-European Registry in Venous Thromboembolism). We calculated direct (clinical events and anticoagulation) and indirect costs (loss of productivity) of an acute PE event and its 12-month follow-up in 2020 Euros. We estimated a disability weight for the 12-month post-PE status and corresponding disability adjusted life years presumably owing to PE. Disease-specific costs in the first year of follow-up after an incident PE case ranged between 9135 Euros and 10 620 Euros. The proportion of indirect costs was 42% to 49% of total costs. Costs were lowest in patients with ongoing cancer, mainly because productivity loss was less evident in this already burdened population. The calculated disability weight for survivors who were cancer free 12 months post-PE was 0.017, and the estimated disability adjusted life years per incident case were 1.17. Conclusions The economic burden imposed by PE to society and affected patients is considerable, and productivity loss is its main driver. The disease burden from PE is remarkable and translates to the loss of roughly 1.2 years of healthy life per incident PE case.

Cost-Effectiveness of Aspirin for Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Major Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Venous thromboembolism extended prophylaxis after inflammatory bowel disease surgery remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if adopting an aspirin-based prophylaxis strategy may address current cost-effectiveness limitations.

METHODS

A decision analysis model was used to compare costs and outcomes of a reference case patient undergoing inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal surgery considered for post-discharge thromboembolism prophylaxis. Low-dose aspirin was compared to an enoxaparin regimen as well as no prophylaxis. Source estimates were obtained from aggregated existing literature. Secondary analysis included out-of-pocket costs. A 10,000-simulation Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis accounted for uncertainty in model estimates.

RESULTS

An enoxaparin-based regimen compared to aspirin demonstrated an unfavorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $908,268 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis supported this finding in > 75% of simulated cases; scenarios favoring enoxaparin included those with > 4% post-discharge event rates. Aspirin versus no prophylaxis demonstrated a favorable ratio of $106,601 per quality-adjusted life year. Findings were vulnerable to a post-discharge thromboembolism rate < 1%, aspirin-associated bleeding rate > 1%, median hospital costs of bleeding > 3 × , and decreased efficacy of aspirin (RR > 0.75). The average out-of-pocket cost of choosing an aspirin ePpx strategy increased by $54 per patient versus $708 per patient with enoxaparin.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose aspirin extended prophylaxis following inflammatory bowel disease surgery has a favorable cost-safety profile and may be an attractive alternative approach.

Do Cost Limitations of Extended Prophylaxis After Surgery Apply to Ulcerative Colitis Patients?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgery patients with ulcerative colitis are at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Extended prophylaxis for thromboembolism prevention has been used in colorectal surgery patients, but it has been criticized for its lack of cost-effectiveness. However, the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis for postoperative ulcerative colitis patients may be unique.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients.

DESIGN

A decision analysis compared costs and benefits in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients with and without extended prophylaxis over a lifetime horizon.

SETTING

Assumptions for decision analysis were identified from available literature for a typical ulcerative colitis patient's risk of thrombosis, age at surgery, type of thrombosis, prophylaxis risk reduction, bleeding complications, and mortality.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Costs ($) and benefits (quality-adjusted life year) reflected a societal perspective and were time-discounted at 3%. Costs and benefits were combined to produce the main outcome measure, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($ per quality-adjusted life year). Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analysis modeled uncertainty in probabilities, costs, and disutilities.

RESULTS

Using reference parameters, the individual expected societal total cost of care was $957 without and $1775 with prophylaxis (not cost-effective; $257,280 per quality-adjusted life year). Preventing a single mortality with prophylaxis would cost $5 million (number needed to treat: 6134 individuals). Adjusting across a range of scenarios upheld these conclusions 77% of the time. With further sensitivity testing, venous thromboembolism cumulative risk (>1.5%) and ePpx regimen pricing (<$299) were the 2 parameters most sensitive to uncertainty.

LIMITATIONS

Recommendations of decision analysis methodology are limited to group decision-making, not an individual risk profile.

CONCLUSION

Routine ePpx in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients is not cost-effective. This finding is sensitive to higher-than-average rates of venous thromboembolism and low-cost prophylaxis opportunities. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B818.

SE APLICAN LAS LIMITACIONES DE COSTOS DE LA PROFILAXIS PROLONGADA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA A LOS PACIENTES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA

ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes de cirugía colorrectal con colitis ulcerosa tienen un mayor riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso posoperatorio. La profilaxis extendida para la prevención de la tromboembolia se ha utilizado en pacientes con cirugía colorrectal, aunque ha sido criticada por su falta de rentabilidad. Sin embargo, la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada para los pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa puede ser aceptable.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa.DISEÑO:Un análisis de decisiones comparó los costos y beneficios en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa con y sin profilaxis prolongada de por vida.AJUSTE:Los supuestos para el análisis de decisiones se identificaron a partir de la literatura disponible para el riesgo de trombosis de un paciente con colitis ulcerosa típica, la edad al momento de la cirugía, el tipo de trombosis, la reducción del riesgo con profilaxis, las complicaciones hemorrágicas y la mortalidad.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los costos ($) y los beneficios (año de vida ajustado por calidad) reflejaron una perspectiva social y se descontaron en el tiempo al 3%. Los costos y los beneficios se combinaron para producir la principal medida de resultado, la relación costo-efectividad incremental ($ por año de vida ajustado por calidad). El análisis de sensibilidad probabilística multivariable modeló la incertidumbre en probabilidades, costos y desutilidades.RESULTADOS:Utilizando parámetros de referencia, el costo total de atención social esperado individual fue de $957 sin profilaxis y $1775 con profilaxis (no rentable; $257,280 por año de vida ajustado por calidad). La prevención de una sola mortalidad con profilaxis costaría $5.0 millones (número necesario a tratar: 6.134 personas). El ajuste en una variedad de escenarios mantuvo estas conclusiones el 77% de las veces. Con más pruebas de sensibilidad, el riesgo acumulado de TEV (>1,5%) y el precio del régimen de ePpx (<$299) fueron los dos parámetros más sensibles a la incertidumbre.LIMITACIONES:Las recomendaciones de la metodología de análisis de decisiones se limitan a la toma de decisiones en grupo, no a un perfil de riesgo individual.CONCLUSIÓN:La profilaxis extendida de rutina en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa no es rentable. Este hallazgo es sensible a tasas de TEV superiores al promedio y oportunidades de profilaxis de bajo costo. Consulted Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B818. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio).

Rivaroxaban: Expanded Role in Cardiovascular Disease Management-A Literature Review

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely used for the prevention of stroke in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, treatment of deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and as prophylaxis after hip and knee surgery after approval by the Food and Drug Administration. In the last decade, DOACs were studied for various indications; this review is focused on rivaroxaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, which is used in an expanded evidence-based fashion for coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, malignancy, and prophylaxis of deep venous thrombosis in acute medical illnesses.

Cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact of rivaroxaban compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism

OBJECTIVES

In the 'Comparison of an Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor With Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer With Venous Thromboembolism' (SELECT-D) trial, rivaroxaban showed relatively low venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence but higher bleeding compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer. We aim to calculate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of rivaroxaban compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk of recurrent VTE.

SETTING

We built a Markov model to calculate the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective over a 5-year time horizon for the Dutch healthcare setting.

PARTICIPANTS

A hypothetical cohort of 1000 cancer patients with VTE entered the model with baseline characteristics based on the SELECT-D trial.

INTERVENTION

Six months of treatment with rivaroxaban (15 mg two times per day for first 3 weeks followed by 20 mg once daily) was compared with 6 months of treatment with dalteparin (200 IU/kg daily during month 1 followed by 150 IU/kg daily).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome of the cost-effectiveness analysis was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of the model was evaluated in probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses. A budget impact analysis was performed to calculate the total annual financial consequences for a societal perspective in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

In the base case and all scenarios, rivaroxaban were cost-saving while also slightly improving the patient's health, resulting in economically dominant ICERs. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 77.8% and 98.7% of the simulations showed rivaroxaban to be cost-saving and more effective for a 5-year and 6-month time horizon, respectively. Rivaroxaban can save up to €11 326 763 (CI €5 164 254 to €17 363 231) in approximately 8000 cancer patients with VTE per year compared with dalteparin based on a 1-year time horizon.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with rivaroxaban is economically dominant over dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk for recurrent VTE in the Netherlands. The use of rivaroxaban instead of dalteparin can save over €10 million per year, primarily driven by the difference in drug costs.

Economic Evaluation of Rivaroxaban Versus Enoxaparin for Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism After Total Knee Replacement and Total Hip Replacement: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) together are called venous thromboembolism (VTE) and impose a high economic burden on healthcare systems. Thousands of people are hospitalized annually due to benign and treatable diseases but die due to PE; with the adoption of appropriate prevention, these deaths can be prevented.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of using rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin in published economic analyses for prevention of VTE after total knee (TKR) or hip replacement (THR).

METHOD

In a systematic review electronic searches were performed on various online databases, including PubMed, Web of science, Embase, Scopus, Health Economic Evaluations Database (HEED), and ProQuest. The inclusion criteria were: studies that were conducted on the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin for the prevention of VTE after TKR and THR; cost-effectiveness studies conducted using decision analysis models based on the economic evaluation approach; studies with available full-text papers; and studies written in English and published between 2007 and 2019. The exclusion criteria were: studies with partial cost effectiveness (such as effectiveness assessment, cost assessment, quality-of-life assessment); studies written in languages other than English; and all protocols, conference abstracts, and letters to the editor. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used to qualitatively evaluate the studies.

RESULTS

Of a total of 537 initial studies, nine papers met the inclusion criteria. The time scope of studies ranged from 3 months to 5 years. Among the selected studies, some studies had included discount rates (n = 4) and the other studies did not utilize discount rates and were set to zero percent by default (n = 5). In all studies, direct medical costs, including costs related to the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of VTE and PE, and management and monitoring of treatment costs were reviewed.

CONCLUSION

The results of this systematic review showed that using rivaroxaban in patients undergoing total knee or hip replacement reduced costs and increased quality of life. However, since most of the studies had been conducted in developed countries, it is not possible to generalize the results to developing countries. Nonetheless, given that rivaroxaban is administered orally and does not require continuous monitoring, it will be less costly for patients and health systems and is more appropriate to administer it as a thromboprophylactic drug following total knee or hip replacement surgery.

Justifying Total Costs of Extended Venothromboembolism Prophylaxis After Colorectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend extended venothromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis for most patients following colorectal cancer surgery, but provider uptake has been limited. The purpose of this study was to identify thresholds for when such extended prophylaxis (ePpx) may be value-appropriate.

METHODS

All colorectal cancer postoperative discharges were identified within a private payer administrative database (MarketScan® 2010-2014, IBM Truven Health Analytics). Outcomes of interest were VTE event rate, mortality, and overall costs of care. The data along with published literature were used as parameter estimations for a decision analysis model with probabilistic sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 22,463 colorectal cancer surgical patients (4.0% with ePpx) that served as the parameter estimates for the decision model with a VTE event rate of 0.2%. Decision analysis demonstrated that prescribing ePpx was dominated by usual practice with the former having higher probability-adjusted incremental costs ($1078.68 per person) and lower probability-adjusted benefits (- 0.000098 quality adjusted life years). Broad sensitivity analysis found that probability of a VTE event, bleeding case fatality rate, and probability of an ePpx-associated bleeding event were the primary effectors of the model. VTE event rates of greater than 3.0% benefited from prescribing ePpx to all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few patients are discharged on ePpx following colorectal cancer surgery despite its endorsement by national guidelines. A decision analysis model does not support the use of ePpx except in cases of markedly high VTE rates. Clinical guidance could be improved by further recognizing the role of risk stratification in the determination of high-risk patients requiring ePpx.

Cost-Benefit Limitations of Extended, Outpatient Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis Following Surgery for Crohn's Disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with Crohn's disease are at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Historically, extended outpatient prophylaxis has not met conventional measures of societal cost-benefit advantage. However, extended prophylaxis for patients with Crohn's disease may be more cost-effective because of the patients' high thrombotic risk and long life expectancy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis in patients with Crohn's disease after abdominal surgery.

DESIGN

A decision tree model was used to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost per case averted with extended-duration venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following abdominal surgery.

SETTING

The risk of a postdischarge thrombotic event, age at surgery, type of thrombotic event, prophylaxis risk reduction, bleeding complications, and mortality were estimated by using existing published sources.

PATIENTS

Studied were patients with Crohn's disease versus routine care.

INTERVENTION

We constructed a decision analysis to compare costs and outcomes in patients with Crohn's disease postoperatively with and without extended prophylaxis over a lifetime horizon.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Productivity costs ($) and benefits (quality-adjusted life-year) were used to reflect a societal perspective and were time discounted at 3%. Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analysis accounted for uncertainty in probabilities, costs, and utility weights.

RESULTS

With the use of reference parameters, the individual expected societal total cost of care was $399.83 without and $1387.95 with prophylaxis. Preventing a single mortality with prophylaxis would cost $43.00 million (number needed to treat: 39,839 individuals). The incremental cost was $1.90 million per quality-adjusted life-year. Adjusting across a range of scenarios upheld these conclusions 88% of the time. With further sensitivity testing, subpopulations with postdischarge thrombosis rates greater than 4.9% favors postoperative extended-duration venous thromboembolism prophylaxis.

LIMITATIONS

Further investigation is needed to determine if specific high-risk individuals can be preemptively identified in the Crohn's surgical population for targeted prophylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Extended prophylaxis in patients with Crohn's disease postoperatively is not cost-effective when the cumulative incidence of posthospital thrombosis remains less than 4.9%. These findings are driven by the low absolute risk of thrombosis in this population and the considerable cost of universal treatment. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A998. LIMITACIONES DE COSTO-BENEFICIO DE LA PROFILAXIS AMBULATORIA PROLONGADA DEL TROMBOEMBOLISMO VENOSO DESPUÉS DE CIRUGÍA EN CASOS DE ENFERMEDAD DE CROHN:: Los pacientes con enfermedad de Crohn tienen un mayor riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso postoperatorio. Históricamente, la profilaxis ambulatoria prolongada no ha cumplido con las medidas convencionales de ventajas en costo-beneficio para la sociedad. Sin embargo, la profilaxis prolongada en los pacientes con Crohn puede ser más rentable debido al alto riesgo trombótico y a una larga esperanza de vida en estos pacientes.Evaluar la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada en pacientes postoperados de un Crohn.Se utilizó un modelo de árbol de decisión para evaluar el incremento de rentabilidad y el costo por cada caso evitado con la profilaxis prolongada de tromboembolismo venoso después de cirugía abdominal.Se calcularon utilizando fuentes publicadas el riesgo de evento trombótico posterior al alta, la edad del paciente al momento de la cirugía, el tipo de evento trombótico, la reducción del riesgo de profilaxis, las complicaciones hemorrágicas y la mortalidad.Se estudiaron los pacientes de atención rutinaria versus aquellos portadores de Crohn.Construimos un arbol de análisis decisional para comparar costos y resultados de pacientes portadores de Crohn, con y sin profilaxis prolongada en el postoperatorio en un horizonte de por vida.Los costos de productividad ($) y los beneficios (año de vida ajustado por calidad) se utilizaron para reflejar la perspectiva social y se descontaron en el tiempo de un 3%. El análisis de sensibilidad probabilística multivariable dió cuenta de la incertidumbre en las probabilidades, costos y peso de utilidades.Usando parámetros de referencia, el costo total social esperado de la atención individual fue de $ 399.83 sin y $ 1,387.95 con profilaxis. La prevención del deceso de un paciente con profilaxis costaría $ 43.00 millones (valor requerido para tratar: 39,839 individuos). El costo incrementado fue de $ 1.90 millones por año de vida ajustado por la calidad. El ajuste a través de una gama de escenarios confirmó estas conclusiones el 88% del tiempo. Con pruebas de sensibilidad adicionales, las subpoblaciones con tasas de trombosis posteriores al alta fueron superiores al 4,9% y favorecían la profilaxis prolongada del tromboembolismo venoso en el postoperatorio.Se necesita más investigación para determinar si se puede identificar de manera preventiva los individuos específicos de alto riesgo en la población quirúrgica de Crohn en casos de profilaxis dirigida.La profilaxis prolongada en pacientes postoperados de un Crohn no es rentable cuando la incidencia acumulada de trombosis posthospitalaria sigue siendo inferior al 4,9%. Estos hallazgos son impulsados por el bajo riesgo absoluto de trombosis en esta población y el costo considerable del tratamiento universal. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A998.

Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban versus apixaban for the initial treatment of venous thromboembolism and extended prevention of recurrences in the UK

Aim: To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness of using rivaroxaban vs apixaban for the initial treatment plus extended prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the UK. Extended prevention was assessed using a 10-mg rivaroxaban dose, as the 20-mg dose has already been evaluated. Methods: A Markov model compared the health outcomes and costs of treating VTE patient cohorts with either rivaroxaban (15 mg twice daily for 3 weeks, followed by 20 mg once daily for 6 months, then extended prevention with 10 mg once daily) or apixaban (10 mg twice daily for 1 week, followed by 5 mg twice daily for 6 months, then extended prevention with 2.5 mg twice daily) over a lifetime horizon. The model included an initial acute treatment and prevention phase (0-6 months) and an extended prevention phase (6-18 months). Efficacy and safety data were derived from two network meta-analyses. Reference treatment comparators were derived from the EINSTEIN-Pooled study and EINSTEIN-CHOICE trial. Healthcare costs and utility data were derived from published literature. Results: The rivaroxaban regimen was associated with increased quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and slightly lower total costs compared with apixaban over a lifetime horizon. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that rivaroxaban remained a cost-effective alternative to apixaban over a wide range of parameters. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates were below the £20,000 per QALY threshold in 74.1% of 2,000 model simulations. Scenario analyses further supported that rivaroxaban is a cost-effective alternative to apixaban. Limitations: Clinical and safety inputs were derived from network meta-analysis, which are subject to inherent limitations whereby small differences between study designs may severely impact efficacy and safety outcomes. Furthermore, these inputs were based on data from clinical trials, which may not reflect real-world data. Conclusions: Rivaroxaban was associated with a slightly lower total cost and increased QALYs compared with apixaban for VTE management in the UK over a lifetime horizon.

Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban and aspirin compared to aspirin alone in patients with stable cardiovascular disease: An Australian perspective

OBJECTIVE

In light of the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial, our objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness, from the Australian healthcare perspective, of rivaroxaban in combination with aspirin versus aspirin alone for the prevention of recurrent cardiovascular disease among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed using input data from the COMPASS trial to predict the clinical course and costs of patients over a 20-year time-horizon. The model comprised of three health states: 'Alive without recurrent CVD', 'Alive after recurrent CVD' and 'Dead'. Costs were from the Australian public healthcare system perspective, and estimated from published sources, as were utility data. The costs of rivaroxaban were based on current acquisition prices on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule (PBS) and assumed as AUD$3.09/day. The main outcome of interest was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in terms of cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained, and cost per year of life saved (YoLS). Costs and benefits were discounted by 5.0% per year.

RESULTS

Compared to aspirin alone, rivaroxaban plus aspirin was estimated to cost an additional AUD$12,156 (discounted) per person, but lead to 0.516 YoLS (discounted) and 0.386 QALYs gained (discounted), over 20 years. These equated to ICERs of AUD$23,560/YoLS and AUD$31,436/QALY gained. We have assumed a threshold of AUD$50,000/QALY gained to signify cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Compared to aspirin, rivaroxaban in combination with aspirin is likely to be cost-effective in preventing recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease.

Cost comparison of continued anticoagulation with rivaroxaban versus placebo based on the 1-year EINSTEIN-Extension trial efficacy and safety results

AIMS

The EINSTEIN-Extension trial (EINSTEIN-EXT) found that continued treatment with rivaroxaban for an additional 6 or 12 months (vs placebo) after 6-12 months of initial anticoagulation significantly reduced the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) with a small non-significant increased risk of major bleeding (none fatal or in critical site). This study aimed to compare total healthcare cost between rivaroxaban and placebo, based on the EINSTEIN-EXT event rates.

METHODS

Total healthcare cost was calculated as the sum of treatment and clinical event costs from a US managed care perspective. Treatment duration and event rates were obtained from the EINSTEIN-EXT study. Adjustment on treatment duration was made by assuming a 10% non-adherence rate. Drug costs were based on wholesale acquisition costs. Cost estimates for clinical events (i.e. recurrent deep vein thrombosis [DVT], recurrent pulmonary embolism, major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding) were determined from the literature. Results were examined over a ±20% range of each cost component and over 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of event rate differences in deterministic (one-way) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA).

RESULTS

Total healthcare cost was $1,454 lower for rivaroxaban-treated (vs placebo-treated) patients in the base-case, with a lower clinical event cost fully offsetting drug cost. The cost savings of recurrent DVT alone (-$3,102) was greater than drug cost ($2,723). Total healthcare cost remained lower for rivaroxaban in the majority (73%) of PSA (cost difference [95% CI] = -$1,454 [-$2,396, $1,231]).

LIMITATIONS

This study was conducted over the 1-year observation period of the EINSTEIN-EXT trial, which limited "real-world" applicability and examination of long-term economic impact. Assumptions on drug and clinical event costs were US-based and, thus, not applicable to other healthcare systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Total healthcare costs were estimated to be lower for patients continuing rivaroxaban therapy compared to those receiving placebo in VTE patients who had completed 6-12 months of VTE treatment.