Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2022 Jan;26(4):1-128. doi: 10.3310/KVOU6959.
Chronic heart failure is a debilitating condition that accounts for an annual NHS spend of £2.3B. Low levels of endogenous coenzyme Q10 may exacerbate chronic heart failure. Coenzyme Q10 supplements might improve symptoms and slow progression. As statins are thought to block the production of coenzyme Q10, supplementation might be particularly beneficial for patients taking statins.
To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of coenzyme Q10 in managing chronic heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction.
A systematic review that included randomised trials comparing coenzyme Q10 plus standard care with standard care alone in chronic heart failure. Trials restricted to chronic heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction were excluded. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched up to March 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (version 5.2). A planned individual participant data meta-analysis was not possible and meta-analyses were mostly based on aggregate data from publications. Potential effect modification was examined using meta-regression. A Markov model used treatment effects from the meta-analysis and baseline mortality and hospitalisation from an observational UK cohort. Costs were evaluated from an NHS and Personal Social Services perspective and expressed in Great British pounds at a 2019/20 price base. Outcomes were expressed in quality-adjusted life-years. Both costs and outcomes were discounted at a 3.5% annual rate.
A total of 26 trials, comprising 2250 participants, were included in the systematic review. Many trials were reported poorly and were rated as having a high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Meta-analysis suggested a possible benefit of coenzyme Q10 on all-cause mortality (seven trials, 1371 participants; relative risk 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 1.03). The results for short-term functional outcomes were more modest or unclear. There was no indication of increased adverse events with coenzyme Q10. Meta-regression found no evidence of treatment interaction with statins. The base-case cost-effectiveness analysis produced incremental costs of £4878, incremental quality-adjusted life-years of 1.34 and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £3650. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that at thresholds of £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year coenzyme Q10 had a high probability (95.2% and 95.8%, respectively) of being more cost-effective than standard care alone. Scenario analyses in which the population and other model assumptions were varied all found coenzyme Q10 to be cost-effective. The expected value of perfect information suggested that a new trial could be valuable.
For most outcomes, data were available from few trials and different trials contributed to different outcomes. There were concerns about risk of bias and whether or not the results from included trials were applicable to a typical UK population. A lack of individual participant data meant that planned detailed analyses of effect modifiers were not possible.
Available evidence suggested that, if prescribed, coenzyme Q10 has the potential to be clinically effective and cost-effective for heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction. However, given important concerns about risk of bias, plausibility of effect sizes and applicability of the evidence base, establishing whether or not coenzyme Q10 is genuinely effective in a typical UK population is important, particularly as coenzyme Q10 has not been subject to the scrutiny of drug-licensing processes. Stronger evidence is needed before considering its prescription in the NHS.
A new independent, well-designed clinical trial of coenzyme Q10 in a typical UK heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction population may be warranted.
This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018106189.
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in ; Vol. 26, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
慢性心力衰竭是一种使人虚弱的疾病,每年使国民保健制度花费 23 亿英镑。内源性辅酶 Q10 水平低可能使慢性心力衰竭恶化。辅酶 Q10 补充剂可能改善症状并减缓进展。由于他汀类药物被认为会阻断辅酶 Q10 的产生,因此补充剂可能对服用他汀类药物的患者特别有益。
评估辅酶 Q10 在管理射血分数降低的慢性心力衰竭方面的临床效果和成本效益。
系统评价包括随机试验,比较辅酶 Q10 加标准治疗与单独标准治疗在慢性心力衰竭中的效果。排除仅限于射血分数保留的慢性心力衰竭的试验。检索包括 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 CENTRAL 在内的数据库,检索截至 2020 年 3 月。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具(版本 5.2)评估偏倚风险。由于无法进行计划的个体参与者数据荟萃分析,因此荟萃分析主要基于出版物的汇总数据。使用荟萃回归检查潜在的效应修饰。Markov 模型使用荟萃分析中的治疗效果和来自英国观察性队列的基线死亡率和住院率。从国民保健制度和个人社会服务的角度评估成本,并以 2019/20 年的价格基础表示为大不列颠英镑。结果以质量调整生命年表示。成本和结果均以 3.5%的年率贴现。
共纳入了 26 项试验,包括 2250 名参与者。许多试验报告不佳,在至少一个领域被评为高或不确定偏倚风险。荟萃分析表明辅酶 Q10 可能对全因死亡率有一定的益处(7 项试验,1371 名参与者;相对风险 0.68,95%置信区间 0.45 至 1.03)。短期功能结果的结果则更为温和或不确定。辅酶 Q10 没有增加不良反应的迹象。荟萃回归没有发现他汀类药物治疗相互作用的证据。基于病例的成本效益分析产生了增量成本 4878 英镑,增量质量调整生命年 1.34 和增量成本效益比 3650 英镑。概率敏感性分析表明,在每质量调整生命年 20000 英镑和 30000 英镑的阈值下,辅酶 Q10 比单独标准治疗更有可能具有高概率(分别为 95.2%和 95.8%)的成本效益。在改变人群和其他模型假设的情景分析中,辅酶 Q10 都具有成本效益。完全信息价值的预期表明,一项新的试验可能具有价值。
对于大多数结果,数据来自少数试验,不同的试验对不同的结果做出了贡献。人们对偏倚风险以及纳入试验的结果是否适用于典型的英国人群存在担忧。缺乏个体参与者数据意味着无法对效应修饰剂进行计划的详细分析。
现有证据表明,如果开处方,辅酶 Q10 有可能对射血分数降低的心力衰竭具有临床效果和成本效益。然而,鉴于对偏倚风险、效应大小的合理性和证据基础的适用性的重要关注,确定辅酶 Q10 在典型的英国人群中是否真正有效是很重要的,特别是因为辅酶 Q10 尚未经过药物许可程序的审查。在考虑将其纳入国民保健制度之前,需要更强的证据。
在射血分数降低的典型英国心力衰竭人群中进行一项新的、独立的、精心设计的辅酶 Q10 临床试验可能是必要的。
本研究在 PROSPERO 注册为 CRD42018106189。
该项目由英国国家卫生研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估计划资助,将在 ; 第 26 卷,第 4 期。有关该项目的更多信息,请访问 NIHR 期刊库网站。