Duke Clinical Research Institute (D.S.C., P.A.C., H.A., K.J.A., M.R.D., L.D.-R., Y.L., D.B.M.), Duke University, Durham, NC.
Department of Cardiac Sciences, Libin Cardiovascular Institute (D.S.C.), University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Circulation. 2022 Mar 15;145(11):819-828. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056276. Epub 2022 Jan 19.
The STICH Randomized Clinical Trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure) demonstrated that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) reduced all-cause mortality rates out to 10 years compared with medical therapy alone (MED) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and reduced left ventricular function (ejection fraction ≤35%). We examined the economic implications of these results.
We used a decision-analytic patient-level simulation model to estimate the lifetime costs and benefits of CABG and MED using patient-level resource use and clinical data collected in the STICH trial. Patient-level costs were calculated by applying externally derived US cost weights to resource use counts during trial follow-up. A 3% discount rate was applied to both future costs and benefits. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio assessed from the US health care sector perspective.
For the CABG arm, we estimated 6.53 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, 5.70-7.53) and a lifetime cost of $140 059 (95% CI, $106 401 to $180 992). For the MED arm, the corresponding estimates were 5.52 (95% CI, 5.06-6.09) quality-adjusted life-years and $74 894 lifetime cost (95% CI, $58 372 to $93 541). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for CABG compared with MED was $63 989 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. At a societal willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, CABG was found to be economically favorable compared with MED in 87% of microsimulations.
In the STICH trial, in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and reduced left ventricular function, CABG was economically attractive relative to MED at current benchmarks for value in the United States.
URL: https://www.
gov; Unique identifier: NCT00023595.
STICH 随机临床试验(外科治疗缺血性心力衰竭)表明,与单独药物治疗(MED)相比,在患有缺血性心肌病和左心室功能降低(射血分数≤35%)的患者中,冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)可降低 10 年内的全因死亡率。我们研究了这些结果的经济意义。
我们使用决策分析患者水平模拟模型,使用 STICH 试验中收集的患者水平资源利用和临床数据,估计 CABG 和 MED 的终生成本和效益。通过将外部得出的美国成本权重应用于试验随访期间的资源使用计数,计算患者水平的成本。对未来的成本和收益均应用 3%的贴现率。主要结果是从美国医疗保健部门的角度评估增量成本效益比。
对于 CABG 组,我们估计有 6.53 个质量调整生命年(95%置信区间,5.70-7.53)和 140059 美元的终生成本(95%置信区间,106401 美元至 180992 美元)。对于 MED 组,相应的估计值为 5.52 个(95%置信区间,5.06-6.09)质量调整生命年和 74894 美元的终生成本(95%置信区间,58372 美元至 93541 美元)。与 MED 相比,CABG 的增量成本效益比为每获得 1 个质量调整生命年增加 63989 美元。在当前美国价值的 100000 美元/质量调整生命年的支付意愿阈值下,在 87%的微观模拟中,CABG 被发现比 MED 更具经济性。
在 STICH 试验中,对于患有缺血性心肌病和左心室功能降低的患者,与 MED 相比,CABG 在当前美国价值基准方面具有吸引力。