Cost-effectiveness of andexanet alfa versus four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the treatment of oral factor Xa inhibitor-related intracranial hemorrhage in the US.
J Med Econ 2022;
25:309-320. [PMID:
35168455 DOI:
10.1080/13696998.2022.2042106]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
Abstract
AIM
To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) on the use of andexanet alfa for the treatment of factor Xa inhibitor-related intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) from the US third-party payer and societal perspectives.
METHODS
CEA compared andexanet alfa to prothrombin complex concentrate for the treatment of patients receiving factor Xa inhibitors admitted to hospital inpatient care with an ICH. The model comprised two linked phases. Phase 1 utilized a decision tree to model the acute treatment phase (admission of a patient with ICH into intensive care for the first 30 days). Phase 2 modeled long-term costs and outcomes using three linked Markov models comprising the six health states defined by the modified Rankin score.
RESULTS
The analysis showed that the strategy of using andexanet alfa for the treatment of factor Xa inhibitor-related ICH is cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life-year gained of $35,872 from a third-party payer perspective and $40,997 from a societal perspective over 20 years.
LIMITATIONS
(1) Absence of head-to-head trials comparing therapies included in the economic model, (2) lack of comparative long-term data on treatment efficacy, and (3) bias resulting from the study designs of published literature.
CONCLUSION
Given these results, the use of andexanet alfa for the reversal of anticoagulation in patients with factor Xa inhibitor-related ICH may improve quality of life and is likely to be cost-effective in a US context.
Collapse