Oxford Outcomes Ltd, Oxford, UK.
J Med Econ. 2013;16(4):510-21. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.768998. Epub 2013 Feb 12.
To evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of 12-months treatment with prasugrel vs clopidogrel from four European healthcare systems' perspectives (Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Turkey).
In the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial, patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were treated with prasugrel or clopidogrel. Prasugrel reduced the composite end-point (cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke), but increased TIMI major bleeding. A Markov model was constructed to facilitate a lifetime horizon for the analysis. A series of risk equations constructed using individual patient data from TRITON-TIMI 38 was used to estimate risks of clinical events. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived by weighting survival time by estimates of health-related quality-of-life. Incremental cost-effectiveness is presented based on differences in treatments' mean costs and QALYs for the licensed population in TRITON-TIMI 38, and the sub-groups of UA-NSTEMI, STEMI, diabetes, and the 'core clinical cohort' (<75 years, ≥60 kg, no history of stroke or TIA).
Mean cost of study drug was €364 (Turkey) to €818 (Germany) higher for prasugrel vs clopidogrel. Rehospitalization costs at 12 months were lower for prasugrel due to reduced rates of revascularization, although hospitalization costs beyond 12 months were higher due to longer life expectancy associated with lower rates of non-fatal MI in the prasugrel group. The incremental cost per QALY saved with prasugrel in the licensed population ranged from €6520 (for Sweden) to €14,350 for (Germany). Prasugrel's cost per QALY was more favourable still in the STEMI and diabetes sub-groups of the licensed population.
Probabilistic analyses of the whole trial population is impractical due to the number of individual patient profiles over which population level results are calculated.
Among patients undergoing PCI for ACS, treatment with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel resulted in favourable cost-effectiveness profiles from these healthcare systems' perspectives.
从四个欧洲医疗体系(德国、瑞典、荷兰和土耳其)的角度评估替格瑞洛治疗 12 个月的长期成本效益。
在 TRITON-TIMI 38 试验中,接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的急性冠脉综合征(ACS)患者接受替格瑞洛或氯吡格雷治疗。替格瑞洛降低了复合终点(心血管死亡、心梗或中风),但增加了 TIMI 大出血。构建了一个马尔可夫模型,以方便分析的终生期限。使用来自 TRITON-TIMI 38 的个体患者数据构建的一系列风险方程用于估计临床事件的风险。通过对生存时间进行健康相关生活质量的估计来计算质量调整生命年(QALYs)。根据 TRITON-TIMI 38 许可人群中治疗方法的平均成本和 QALYs 的差异,以及 UA-NSTEMI、STEMI、糖尿病和“核心临床队列”(<75 岁,≥60kg,无中风或 TIA 史)亚组,提出增量成本效益。
替格瑞洛的研究药物平均成本比氯吡格雷高 364 欧元(土耳其)至 818 欧元(德国)。由于血运重建率降低,替格瑞洛 12 个月时的再住院费用较低,但由于替格瑞洛组非致命性心梗发生率较低,预期寿命延长,12 个月后住院费用较高。在许可人群中,替格瑞洛每增加一个质量调整生命年的成本从瑞典的 6520 欧元到德国的 14350 欧元不等。在许可人群的 STEMI 和糖尿病亚组中,替格瑞洛的成本效益比仍然更有利。
由于计算人群水平结果的个体患者资料数量过多,对整个试验人群进行概率分析是不切实际的。
在接受 ACS 行 PCI 的患者中,与氯吡格雷相比,替格瑞洛的治疗具有从这些医疗体系角度来看有利的成本效益。