School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Regents Court, Sheffield, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2009 Sep;13 Suppl 2:55-62. doi: 10.3310/hta13suppl2/08.
This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate (DBG) for the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients undergoing elective hip and knee surgery based upon a review of the manufacturer's submission to the NICE as part of the single technology appraisal (STA) process. The submission's evidence came from three reasonable-quality trials comparing DBG with enoxaparin, and a comparison of DBG with fondaparinux based on the relative efficacy and safety as derived from a mixed treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis. DBG (220 mg and 150 mg once daily) is not inferior to enoxaparin (40 mg once daily and 30 mg twice daily) in terms of major VTE or VTE-related events (secondary outcome). Meta-analysis shows that 220 mg DBG is not inferior to enoxaparin (40 mg once daily or 30 mg twice daily) in reducing total VTE and all-cause mortality (primary outcome) in total hip or knee replacement, whereas there is uncertainty around the clinical effectiveness of 150 mg DBG for this outcome. In the MTC analysis DBG compared favourably with the other interventions, with the exception of extended enoxaparin and fondaparinux. The adverse event profile was not significantly different in those receiving DBG and those receiving enoxaparin. The submitted two-phase economic model compares DBG with enoxaparin and fondaparinux in total hip and knee replacement. The model structure is appropriate and the model assumptions are reasonable. The health states, costs, utilities and recurrence rates used are considered to be appropriate for the required analysis. The model estimated that at the licensed dose of 220 mg once daily DBG dominates enoxaparin in both total hip replacement and total knee replacement and that at the lower dose of 150 mg once daily DBG dominates enoxaparin in total hip replacement and enoxaparin dominates DBG in total knee replacement. DBG is less cost-effective than fondaparinux in total hip replacement at both doses; the cost per quality-adjusted life-year of fondaparinux versus DBG is 11,111 pounds and 6857 pounds for the higher and lower doses of DBG respectively. In total knee replacement, both DBG doses are dominated by fondaparinux. For DBG versus all comparators in all cases the cost-effectiveness results are based on small incremental cost and health benefits. Weaknesses of the submitted evidence include that methods used for screening studies, data extraction and applying quality assessment criteria to included studies, as well as key details of trials included in the MTC, were not adequately described. In addition, some input parameters into the modelling process are incorrect. The ERG was unable to correct all of these mistakes and the impact on the model results is therefore unknown. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidance issued as a result of the STA states that DBG is recommended as an option for the primary prevention of VTE events in adults who have undergone elective total hip or knee replacement surgery.
本文总结了证据审查小组(ERG)关于达比加群酯(DBG)预防择期髋关节和膝关节手术后静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)的临床有效性和成本效益的报告,该报告基于制造商向 NICE 提交的内容,作为单一技术评估(STA)过程的一部分。提交的证据来自三项合理质量的试验,将 DBG 与依诺肝素进行比较,以及基于混合治疗比较(MTC)荟萃分析得出的相对疗效和安全性,将 DBG 与那屈肝素进行比较。DBG(220mg 和 150mg 每日一次)在主要 VTE 或 VTE 相关事件(次要结局)方面不劣于依诺肝素(40mg 每日一次和 30mg 每日两次)。荟萃分析显示,在全髋关节或全膝关节置换中,220mg DBG 与依诺肝素(40mg 每日一次或 30mg 每日两次)在降低总 VTE 和全因死亡率(主要结局)方面无差异,但对于 150mg DBG 的这种结局,临床有效性存在不确定性。在 MTC 分析中,DBG 与其他干预措施相比表现良好,除了延长依诺肝素和那屈肝素。接受 DBG 和依诺肝素治疗的患者的不良事件谱没有显著差异。提交的两阶段经济模型将 DBG 与依诺肝素和那屈肝素在全髋关节和全膝关节置换中进行比较。模型结构适当,模型假设合理。用于分析的健康状态、成本、效用和复发率被认为是合适的。该模型估计,在许可剂量的 220mg 每日一次时,DBG 在全髋关节置换和全膝关节置换中均优于依诺肝素,而在较低剂量的 150mg 每日一次时,DBG 在全髋关节置换中优于依诺肝素,而依诺肝素在全膝关节置换中优于 DBG。在全髋关节置换中,DBG 的两个剂量均劣于那屈肝素;与 DBG 相比,那屈肝素的每质量调整生命年成本为 11111 英镑,DBG 的两个剂量分别为 11111 英镑和 6857 英镑。在全膝关节置换中,DBG 的两个剂量均劣于那屈肝素。对于 DBG 与所有情况下的所有比较剂,成本效益结果均基于较小的增量成本和健康收益。提交证据的弱点包括用于筛选研究、数据提取和对纳入研究应用质量评估标准的方法,以及 MTC 中纳入试验的关键细节,都没有得到充分描述。此外,建模过程中的一些输入参数是不正确的。ERG 无法纠正所有这些错误,因此对模型结果的影响是未知的。NICE 发布的 STA 指南指出,DBG 被推荐作为预防择期全髋关节或全膝关节置换术后成年人静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)事件的一种选择。