Suppr超能文献

达比加群酯预防心房颤动患者的卒中及全身性栓塞:英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所的一项单次技术评估。

Dabigatran for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation: A NICE single technology appraisal.

机构信息

Centre for Health Economics, Alcuin 'A' Block, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 2013 Jul;31(7):551-62. doi: 10.1007/s40273-013-0051-8.

Abstract

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) invited the manufacturer of dabigatran etexilate (Boehringer Ingelheim Ltd, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this drug for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) as part of the NICE single technology appraisal process. The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and the Centre for Health Economics at the University of York were commissioned to act as the evidence review group (ERG). This article presents a summary of the manufacturer's submission, the ERG report and the subsequent development of NICE guidance for the use of dabigatran within the UK National Health Service. Dabigatran was granted marketing authorisation by the European Medicines Agency for a sequential dosing regimen (DBG sequential), in which patients under 80 years are treated with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily (DBG150) and patients 80 years and over are given dabigatran 110 mg twice daily (DBG110). NICE decisions are bound by the marketing authorisation; therefore, the decision problem faced by the committee was whether the DBG sequential regimen was effective and cost-effective compared with warfarin or aspirin for patients with non-valvular AF and one or more risk factors. The RE-LY trial, a large multi-centre non-inferiority randomised clinical trial, was the primary source of clinical evidence. DBG150 was shown to be non-inferior, and subsequently superior to warfarin, for the primary outcome of all stroke/systemic embolism. DBG110 was found to be non-inferior to warfarin. Results were presented for a post hoc subgroup analysis for patients under and over 80 years of age, where DBG110 showed a statistically significant reduction of haemorrhagic stroke and intracranial haemorrhage in comparison to warfarin in patients over 80 years of age. This post hoc subgroup analysis by age was the basis for the licensed DBG sequential regimen. The economic evaluation compared the costs and outcomes of DBG110, DBG150 and DBG sequential against warfarin, aspirin, and aspirin plus clopidogrel. Across the three dosing regimens, dabigatran was associated with greater costs and better health outcomes than warfarin; however, DBG150 offered the most benefits and dominated DBG110 and DBG sequential (i.e. less costly and more effective). The cost-effectiveness of DBG150 was less favourable for patients well controlled on warfarin. In the first appraisal meeting, the committee issued a 'minded no' decision until additional analyses on the licensed DBG sequential regimen were presented by the manufacturer. These additional analyses indicated that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the DBG sequential regimen compared with warfarin ranged from £8,388 to £18,987 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained depending on the level of monitoring costs assumed for warfarin. Patients on warfarin would need to be within therapeutic range 83-85 % of the time for the ICER to exceed £30,000 per additional QALY. Following consideration of the additional evidence and the responses from a large number of consultees and commentators, the committee recommended dabigatran as DBG sequential as an option for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in people with non-valvular AF with one or more risk factors for ischaemic stroke.

摘要

国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)邀请达比加群酯的制造商(勃林格殷格翰有限公司,英国)提交关于这种药物在预防非瓣膜性心房颤动(AF)患者中风和全身性栓塞方面的临床和成本效益的证据,作为 NICE 单一技术评估过程的一部分。约克大学的评论与传播中心和卫生经济学中心被委托作为证据审查小组(ERG)。本文总结了制造商的提交材料、ERG 报告以及 NICE 随后为英国国民保健系统中达比加群酯的使用制定的指导意见。达比加群酯已获得欧洲药品管理局的上市许可,用于序贯给药方案(DBG 序贯),80 岁以下的患者接受达比加群酯 150mg 每日两次(DBG150),80 岁及以上的患者接受达比加群酯 110mg 每日两次(DBG110)。NICE 的决策受上市许可的限制;因此,委员会面临的决策问题是,与华法林或阿司匹林相比,DBG 序贯方案在非瓣膜性 AF 且有一个或多个缺血性中风风险因素的患者中是否有效且具有成本效益。RE-LY 试验是一项大型多中心非劣效性随机临床试验,是主要的临床证据来源。DBG150 在所有中风/全身性栓塞的主要结局方面显示非劣效性,随后优于华法林。DBG110 被发现与华法林非劣效。对年龄在 80 岁以下和 80 岁以上的患者进行了事后亚组分析,结果显示 DBG110 与华法林相比,在 80 岁以上的患者中,出血性中风和颅内出血的发生率显著降低。基于年龄的事后亚组分析是许可的 DBG 序贯方案的基础。经济评估比较了 DBG110、DBG150 和 DBG 序贯与华法林、阿司匹林和阿司匹林加氯吡格雷的成本和结果。在三种给药方案中,与华法林相比,达比加群酯的成本更高,健康结果更好;然而,DBG150 提供了最大的效益,优于 DBG110 和 DBG 序贯(即成本更低,效益更高)。DBG150 的成本效益对华法林控制良好的患者不利。在第一次评估会议上,委员会作出了“无倾向性”的决定,直到制造商提出了关于许可的 DBG 序贯方案的额外分析。这些额外的分析表明,与华法林相比,DBG 序贯方案的增量成本效益比(ICER)在 83-85%的时间内,治疗范围的 INR 值为 83-85%,每获得一个质量调整生命年(QALY)增加 8388-18987 英镑。对于 INR 值在 83-85%范围内的患者,ICER 超过 30000 英镑/QALY 时,需要更多的监测成本来管理 INR 值。考虑到额外的证据以及大量顾问和评论员的回应,委员会建议将达比加群酯作为 DBG 序贯方案,作为预防非瓣膜性 AF 且有一个或多个缺血性中风风险因素的患者中风和全身性栓塞的一种选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验