Kent David M, Hayward Rodney A, Griffith John L, Vijan Sandeep, Beshansky Joni R, Califf Robert M, Selker Harry P
Division of Clinical Care Research, Department of Medicine, New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, USA.
Am J Med. 2002 Aug 1;113(2):104-11. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(02)01160-9.
In the Global Utilization of Streptokinase and tPA for Occluded coronary arteries (GUSTO) trial, patients with myocardial infarction who were treated with tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) had a 6.3% 30-day mortality, compared with a mortality of 7.3% among those treated with streptokinase, despite a greater risk of intracranial hemorrhage with tPA. However, in part because of its higher cost, tPA has not been adopted universally.
Using an independently developed model, we predicted the benefits of tPA therapy in the 24,146 patients in the GUSTO trial and compared these predictions with the actual benefits of tPA, after classifying patients by their risks of mortality and intracranial hemorrhage. We also performed a "patient-specific" cost-effectiveness analysis among different strata of expected benefit of tPA.
Our model predicted that among patients with myocardial infarction, 61% of the benefit of tPA use in reducing mortality accrued to only 25% of patients; treating half of patients could capture 85% of the benefit. Including the risk of intracranial hemorrhage, our model predicted that treating half the GUSTO patients with tPA and the others with streptokinase would yield similar outcomes as treating all patients with tPA, because the additional risk of intracranial hemorrhage exceeded the expected benefit in some patients. When patients were stratified into quartiles of risk, the observed outcomes in the GUSTO patients corresponded well with these predicted results. The estimated cost-effectiveness of tPA was sensitive to patient characteristics.
For selected patients, use of tPA yields substantially better outcomes than streptokinase, and use of the less expensive agent is difficult to justify. For many patients, however, tPA is unlikely to provide any additional benefit and, in some patients, it may even cause net harm.
在全球应用链激酶和组织型纤溶酶原激活剂治疗闭塞冠状动脉(GUSTO)试验中,接受组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(tPA)治疗的心肌梗死患者30天死亡率为6.3%,而接受链激酶治疗的患者死亡率为7.3%,尽管tPA导致颅内出血的风险更高。然而,部分由于其成本较高,tPA尚未被普遍采用。
我们使用一个独立开发的模型,预测了GUSTO试验中24146例患者接受tPA治疗的获益情况,并在根据患者的死亡风险和颅内出血风险进行分类后,将这些预测结果与tPA的实际获益进行了比较。我们还在tPA预期获益的不同分层中进行了“患者特异性”成本效益分析。
我们的模型预测,在心肌梗死患者中,tPA降低死亡率的获益有61%仅归于25%的患者;治疗一半的患者可获得85%的获益。纳入颅内出血风险后,我们的模型预测,对一半的GUSTO患者使用tPA,另一半使用链激酶,其结果与对所有患者使用tPA相似,因为在一些患者中,颅内出血的额外风险超过了预期获益。当将患者按风险四分位数分层时,GUSTO患者的观察结果与这些预测结果非常吻合。tPA的估计成本效益对患者特征敏感。
对于选定的患者,使用tPA比链激酶能产生显著更好的结果,而使用较便宜的药物则难以自圆其说。然而,对于许多患者来说,tPA不太可能带来任何额外的益处,在一些患者中,它甚至可能造成净危害。