PELyon, Lyon, France.
Département de Cardiologie, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université de Paris, Paris, France.
Eur J Health Econ. 2023 Aug;24(6):867-875. doi: 10.1007/s10198-022-01513-2. Epub 2022 Aug 28.
Compare costs associated with all-cause healthcare resource use (HCRU), stroke/systemic thromboembolism (STE) and major bleedings (MB) between patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) initiating apixaban or other oral anticoagulants (OACs).
We performed a retrospective cohort study using the French healthcare claims database, including NVAF patients between 2014/01/01 and 2016/12/31, followed until 2016/12/31. We used 4 sub-cohorts of OAC-naive patients, respectively initiating apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban or VKAs. We matched patients initiating apixaban with patients initiating each other OACs using 1:n propensity score matching. All-cause HCRU and event-related costs by OAC treatment were estimated and compared between matched patients using generalised-linear models with gamma-distribution and two-part models.
There were 175,766 patients in the apixaban-VKA, 181,809 in the apixaban-rivaroxaban, and 42,490 in the apixaban-dabigatran matched cohorts. Patients initiating apixaban had significantly lower HCRU costs than patients initiating VKA (€1,105 vs. €1,578, p < 0.0001), dabigatran (€993 vs. €1,140, p < 0.0001) and rivaroxaban (€1,013 vs. €1,088 p < 0.0001). They have had significantly lower costs related to stroke/STE and MB than patients initiating VKA (respectively, €183 vs. €449 and €147 vs. €413; p < 0.0001), rivaroxaban (respectively, €145 vs. €197 and €129 vs. €193; p < 0.0001), and lower costs related to stroke/STE than patients initiating dabigatran (€135 vs. €192, p < 0.02). Costs related to MB were not significantly different in patients initiating apixaban and those initiating dabigatran (€119 vs. €149, p = 0.07).
HCRU and most event-related costs were lower in patients initiating apixaban compared to other OACs. Apixaban may be cost-saving compared to VKAs, and significantly cheaper than other DOACs, although cost differences are limited.
比较非瓣膜性心房颤动(NVAF)患者起始应用阿哌沙班或其他口服抗凝药物(OAC)后全因医疗资源使用(HCRU)、卒中/系统性血栓栓塞(STE)和主要出血(MB)相关的成本。
我们使用法国医保索赔数据库进行了一项回顾性队列研究,纳入 2014 年 1 月 1 日至 2016 年 12 月 31 日期间的 NVAF 患者,随访至 2016 年 12 月 31 日。我们使用了 OAC 初治患者的 4 个亚队列,分别起始应用阿哌沙班、达比加群、利伐沙班或 VKA。我们使用 1:n 倾向评分匹配,将起始应用阿哌沙班的患者与起始应用其他 OAC 的患者进行匹配。使用具有伽马分布和两部分模型的广义线性模型,估算并比较匹配患者的全因 HCRU 成本和 OAC 治疗相关的事件成本。
阿哌沙班-VKA 匹配队列有 175766 例患者,阿哌沙班-利伐沙班匹配队列有 181809 例,阿哌沙班-达比加群匹配队列有 42490 例。与起始应用 VKA 相比,起始应用阿哌沙班的患者 HCRU 成本显著更低(€1105 比 €1578,p<0.0001)、达比加群(€993 比 €1140,p<0.0001)和利伐沙班(€1013 比 €1088,p<0.0001)。与起始应用 VKA 相比,起始应用阿哌沙班的患者与卒中/STE 和 MB 相关的成本显著更低(分别为 €183 比 €449 和 €147 比 €413,p<0.0001)、利伐沙班(分别为 €145 比 €197 和 €129 比 €193,p<0.0001),且与起始应用达比加群的患者相比,卒中/STE 相关的成本更低(€135 比 €192,p<0.02)。与起始应用达比加群相比,起始应用阿哌沙班的患者 MB 相关成本无显著差异(€119 比 €149,p=0.07)。
与其他 OAC 相比,起始应用阿哌沙班的患者 HCRU 和大多数事件相关成本更低。与 VKA 相比,阿哌沙班可能具有成本节约效应,且明显低于其他 DOAC,但成本差异有限。