Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
Center for Drug Safety and Policy Research, Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
PLoS One. 2019 Dec 2;14(12):e0224580. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224580. eCollection 2019.
The use of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with lower rates of cardiovascular events but increased risks of bleeding complications. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of aspirin therapy for primary prevention of CVD in Chinese DM patients. A life-long Markov model was developed to compare aspirin therapy (100mg daily) versus no use of aspirin in DM patients with no history of CVD. Model validation was conducted by comparing the simulated event rates with data reported in a clinical trial. Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYs) were the primary outcomes from the perspective of healthcare system in China. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the uncertainty of model inputs. Base-case analysis showed aspirin therapy was more costly (USD1,086 versus USD819) with higher QALYs gained (11.94 versus 11.86 QALYs) compared to no use of aspirin. The base-case results were sensitive to the odds ratio of all-cause death in aspirin therapy versus no use of aspirin. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that aspirin therapy gained an additional 0.066 QALYs (95% CI: -0.167 QALYs-0.286 QALYs) at higher cost by USD352 (95% CI: USD130-644)). Using 30,000 USD/QALY as willingness-to-pay threshold, aspirin therapy and no use of aspirin were the preferred option in 68.71% and 31.29% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, respectively. In conclusion, aspirin therapy appears to be cost-effective compared with no use of aspirin in primary prevention of CVD in Chinese DM patients.
阿司匹林用于糖尿病患者(DM)的心血管疾病(CVD)一级预防与心血管事件发生率降低相关,但出血并发症风险增加。我们旨在研究阿司匹林治疗在中国 DM 患者 CVD 一级预防中的成本效益。开发了一个终生 Markov 模型,以比较无 CVD 病史的 DM 患者中阿司匹林治疗(每日 100mg)与不使用阿司匹林的情况。通过将模拟事件发生率与临床试验报告的数据进行比较,对模型进行验证。直接医疗成本和获得的质量调整生命年(QALYs)是中国医疗保健系统的主要结果。进行敏感性分析以检查模型输入的不确定性。基础案例分析表明,与不使用阿司匹林相比,阿司匹林治疗更昂贵(1086 美元对 819 美元),获得的 QALYs 更高(11.94 对 11.86 QALYs)。基础案例结果对阿司匹林治疗与不使用阿司匹林的全因死亡率的比值敏感。概率敏感性分析发现,在更高的成本下,阿司匹林治疗增加了 0.066 QALYs(95%CI:-0.167 QALYs-0.286 QALYs)(95%CI:130 美元至 644 美元)。使用 30000 美元/QALY 作为意愿支付阈值,在 10000 次蒙特卡罗模拟中的 68.71%和 31.29%中,阿司匹林治疗和不使用阿司匹林分别是首选方案。结论:与不使用阿司匹林相比,阿司匹林治疗在中国 DM 患者 CVD 一级预防中具有成本效益。