Baber Usman, Leisman Daniel E, Cohen David J, Gibson C Michael, Henry Timothy D, Dangas George, Moliterno David, Kini Annapoorna, Krucoff Mitchell, Colombo Antonio, Chieffo Alaide, Sartori Samantha, Witzenbichler Bernhard, Steg Philippe Gabriel, Pocock Stuart J, Mehran Roxana
Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY (U.B., D.E.L., G.D., A.K., S.S., R.M.).
Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, University of Missouri-Kansas City (D.J.C.).
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2019 Jan;12(1):e004945. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.004945.
Balancing ischemic and bleeding risk is an evolving framework.
Our objectives were to simulate changes in risks for adverse events and event-driven costs with use of ticagrelor or prasugrel versus clopidogrel according to varying levels of ischemic and bleeding risk. Using the validated PARIS risk functions, we estimated 1-year ischemic (myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis) and bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 or 5) event rates among PARIS study participants who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation for an acute coronary syndrome and were discharged with aspirin and clopidogrel (n=1497). Simulated changes in adverse events with ticagrelor or prasugrel were calculated by applying treatment effects from randomized trials for a 1-year time horizon. Event costs were estimated using National Inpatient Sample data. Net costs were calculated between antiplatelet therapy groups according to level of ischemic and bleeding risk. After weighting events for quality-of-life impact, we calculated event rates and costs for risk-tailored treatment versus clopidogrel under multiple drug pricing assumptions. One-year rates (per 1000 person-years) for ischemic events were 12.6, 24.1, and 66.1, respectively, among those at low (n=630), intermediate (n=536), and high (n=331) ischemic risk. Analogous bleeding rates were 11.0, 23.9, and 66.2, respectively, among low (n=728), intermediate (n=634), and high (n=135) bleeding risk patients. Mean per event costs were $22 174 (ischemic) and $12 203 (bleeding). When risks for ischemia matched or exceeded bleeding, simulated utility-weighted event rates favored ticagrelor/prasugrel, whereas clopidogrel reduced utility-weighted events when bleeding exceeded ischemic risk. One-year costs were sensitive to drug pricing assumptions, and risk-tailored treatment with either agent progressed from cost incurring to cost saving with increasing generic market share.
Tailoring antiplatelet therapy intensity to patient risk may improve health utility and could produce cost savings in the first year after percutaneous coronary intervention.
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00998127.
平衡缺血风险和出血风险是一个不断发展的框架。
我们的目标是根据不同水平的缺血和出血风险,模拟使用替格瑞洛或普拉格雷与氯吡格雷相比,不良事件风险和事件驱动成本的变化。利用经过验证的PARIS风险函数,我们估计了PARIS研究参与者中1年的缺血(心肌梗死或支架血栓形成)和出血(出血学术研究联盟3型或5型)事件发生率。这些参与者因急性冠状动脉综合征接受药物洗脱支架植入的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,并在出院时服用阿司匹林和氯吡格雷(n = 1497)。通过应用随机试验中1年时间范围内的治疗效果,计算替格瑞洛或普拉格雷不良事件的模拟变化。使用国家住院样本数据估计事件成本。根据缺血和出血风险水平,计算抗血小板治疗组之间的净成本。在对事件的生活质量影响进行加权后,我们根据多种药物定价假设,计算了风险调整治疗与氯吡格雷相比的事件发生率和成本。在低(n = 630)、中(n = 536)和高(n = 331)缺血风险人群中,缺血事件的1年发生率(每1000人年)分别为12.6、24.1和66.1。在低(n = 728)、中(n = 634)和高(n = 135)出血风险患者中,类似的出血发生率分别为11.0、23.9和66.2。每个事件的平均成本为22174美元(缺血)和12203美元(出血)。当缺血风险与出血风险相当或超过出血风险时,模拟的效用加权事件发生率有利于替格瑞洛/普拉格雷,而当出血风险超过缺血风险时,氯吡格雷可降低效用加权事件。1年成本对药物定价假设敏感,随着仿制药市场份额增加,使用任何一种药物进行风险调整治疗从成本增加变为成本节约。
根据患者风险调整抗血小板治疗强度可能会提高健康效用,并可能在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后的第一年节省成本。
网址:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov 。唯一标识符:NCT00998127。