Abdel-Qadir Husam, Roifman Idan, Wijeysundera Harindra C
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (Abdel-Qadir, Roifman, Wijeysundera); Schulich Heart Program and the Sunnybrook Research Institute (Roifman, Wijeysundera); Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (Abdel-Qadir, Roifman, Wijeysundera), University of Toronto; Women's College Hospital (Abdel-Qadir), Toronto, Ont.
CMAJ Open. 2015 Dec 9;3(4):E438-46. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20150056. eCollection 2015 Oct-Dec.
The use of prasugrel or ticagrelor as part of dual antiplatelet therapy with acetylsalicylic acid after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) improves clinical outcomes relative to clopidogrel. The relative cost-effectiveness of these agents are unknown. We conducted an economic analysis evaluating 12 months of treatment with clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor after ACS.
We developed a fully probabilistic Markov cohort decision-analytic model using a lifetime horizon, from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. The model incorporated risks of death, recurrent ACS, heart failure, major bleeding and other adverse effects of treatment. Data on probabilities and utilities were obtained from the published literature where available. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).
Treatment with clopidogrel was associated with the lowest effectiveness (7.41 QALYs, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-14.79) and the lowest cost ($39 601, 95% CI $8434-$111 186). Ticagrelor treatment had an effectiveness of 7.50 QALYs (95% CI 1.13-14.84) at a cost of $40 649 (95% CI $9327-$111 881). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ticagrelor relative to clopidogrel was $12 205 per QALY gained. Prasugrel had an ICER of $57 630 per QALY gained relative to clopidogrel. Ticagrelor was the preferred option in 90% of simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY gained.
Ticagrelor was the most cost-effective agent when used as part of dual antiplatelet therapy after ACS. This conclusion was robust to wide variations in model parameters.
在急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)后,使用普拉格雷或替格瑞洛联合乙酰水杨酸进行双重抗血小板治疗,相对于氯吡格雷可改善临床结局。这些药物的相对成本效益尚不清楚。我们进行了一项经济分析,评估ACS后使用氯吡格雷、普拉格雷或替格瑞洛进行12个月治疗的情况。
我们从安大略省卫生和长期护理部的角度,使用终生视角开发了一个完全概率性的马尔可夫队列决策分析模型。该模型纳入了死亡、复发性ACS、心力衰竭、大出血及其他治疗不良反应的风险。概率和效用数据尽可能从已发表的文献中获取。主要结局为质量调整生命年(QALY)。
氯吡格雷治疗的有效性最低(7.41个QALY,95%置信区间[CI]为1.05 - 14.79),成本也最低(39601美元,95%CI为8434 - 111186美元)。替格瑞洛治疗的有效性为7.50个QALY(95%CI为1.13 - 14.84),成本为40649美元(95%CI为9327 - 111881美元)。替格瑞洛相对于氯吡格雷的增量成本效益比(ICER)为每获得1个QALY增加12205美元。普拉格雷相对于氯吡格雷的ICER为每获得1个QALY增加57630美元。在每获得1个QALY支付意愿阈值为50000美元的情况下,90%的模拟中替格瑞洛是首选方案。
在ACS后作为双重抗血小板治疗的一部分使用时,替格瑞洛是最具成本效益的药物。这一结论在模型参数的广泛变化中具有稳健性。