Suppr超能文献

氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林用于不适合使用华法林的房颤患者卒中预防的成本效益。

Cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel plus aspirin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation in whom warfarin is unsuitable.

机构信息

School of Pharmacy, University of Connecticut, Storrs, USA.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 2012 Apr 1;109(7):1020-5. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.11.034. Epub 2012 Jan 3.

Abstract

Guidelines for atrial fibrillation (AF) recommend clopidogrel plus aspirin as an alternative stroke prevention strategy in patients in whom warfarin is unsuitable. A Markov model was conducted from a Medicare prospective using data from the Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events-A (ACTIVE-A) trial and other published studies. Base-case analysis evaluated patients 65 years old with AF, a CHADS(2) (congestive heart failure, 1 point; hypertension defined as blood pressure consistently >140/90 mm Hg or antihypertension medication, 1 point; age ≥75 years, 1 point; diabetes mellitus, 1 point; previous stroke or transient ishemic attack, 2 points) score of 2, and a lower risk for major bleeding. Patients received clopidogrel 75 mg/day plus aspirin or aspirin alone. Patients were followed for up to 35 years. Outcomes included quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (in 2011 American dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Quality-adjusted life expectancy and costs were 9.37 QALYs and $88,751 with clopidogrel plus aspirin and 9.01 QALYs and $79,057 with aspirin alone. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for clopidogrel plus aspirin was $26,928/QALY. With 1-way sensitivity analysis using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, clopidogrel plus aspirin was no longer cost effective when the CHADS(2) score was ≤1, major bleeding risk with aspirin was ≥2.50%/patient-year, the relative risk decrease for ischemic stroke with clopidogrel plus aspirin versus aspirin alone was <25%, and the utility of being healthy with AF on combination therapy decreased to 0.95. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated that clopidogrel plus aspirin was cost effective in 55% and 73% of 10,000 iterations assuming willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000/QALY. In conclusion, clopidogrel plus aspirin appears cost-effective compared to aspirin alone for stroke prevention in patients with AF with a CHADS(2) of ≥2 and a lower risk of bleeding.

摘要

房颤(AF)指南建议,对于华法林不适用的患者,氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林可作为一种替代的卒中预防策略。本研究采用从医疗保险前瞻性研究中获得的数据,通过 Markov 模型,对来自ACTIVE-A 试验和其他已发表研究的房颤氯吡格雷试验与依贝沙坦预防血管事件(ACTIVE-A)试验中的患者进行了分析。基础病例分析评估了年龄在 65 岁及以上、CHADS₂(充血性心力衰竭,1 分;血压持续>140/90mmHg 或使用降压药物,1 分;年龄≥75 岁,1 分;糖尿病,1 分;既往卒中或短暂性脑缺血发作,2 分)评分为 2 分且大出血风险较低的 AF 患者。患者接受氯吡格雷 75mg/天联合阿司匹林或单独使用阿司匹林治疗。患者的随访时间最长为 35 年。研究结果包括质量调整生命年(QALY)、成本(2011 年以美元计)和增量成本效益比。氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林组的质量调整预期寿命和成本分别为 9.37QALY 和 88751 美元,单独使用阿司匹林组分别为 9.01QALY 和 79057 美元。氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林的增量成本效益比为 26928 美元/QALY。在 1 种敏感性分析中,假设意愿支付阈值为 50000 美元/QALY,当 CHADS₂评分≤1 时,阿司匹林的大出血风险≥2.50%/患者年,氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林与单独使用阿司匹林相比,缺血性卒中的相对风险降低<25%,以及联合治疗下房颤患者健康状态的效用降低至 0.95 时,氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林不再具有成本效益。蒙特卡罗模拟表明,假设意愿支付阈值为 50000 美元和 100000 美元/QALY,氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林在 10000 次迭代的 55%和 73%中具有成本效益。总之,与单独使用阿司匹林相比,氯吡格雷联合阿司匹林在 CHADS₂≥2 且出血风险较低的 AF 患者中用于卒中预防具有成本效益。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验