Search

Objective: To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of 12 months treatment of prasugrel compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the Spanish health care system. Methods: A Markov state transition model was developed to estimate health outcomes, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), life years (LY), and costs over patients' lifetimes. Clinical inputs were based on an analysis of the TRITON-TIMI 38 clinical trial. Hospital readmissions captured during the trial in a sub-study of patients from eight countries (and subsequent re-hospitalisations modelled to accrue beyond the time horizon of the trial), were assigned to Spanish diagnosis-related group payment schedules to estimate hospitalisation costs. Results: Mean total treatment costs were €11,427 and €10,910 for prasugrel and clopidogrel respectively. The mean cost of the study drug was €538 higher for prasugrel vs. clopidogrel, but rehospitalisation costs at 12 months were €79 lower for prasugrel due to reduced rates of revascularisation. Hospitalisation costs beyond 12 months were higher with prasugrel by €55, due to longer life expectancy (+0.071 LY and +0.054 QALYs) associated with the decreased nonfatal myocardial infarction rate in the prasugrel group. The incremental cost per life year and QALY gained with prasugrel was €7,198, and €9,489, respectively. Conclusion: Considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000/QALY gained in the Spanish setting, prasugrel represents a cost-effective option in comparison with clopidogrel among patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Objetivo: Evaluar a largo plazo el coste-efectividad de 12 meses de tratamiento con prasugrel frente a clopidogrel en pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo (SCA) sometidos a intervención coronaria percutánea (ICP) desde la perspectiva del sistema nacional de salud español. Métodos: Se desarrolló un modelo de Markov de transición entre estados para estimar los resultados en salud, los años de vida ajustados por calidad (AVACs), los años de vida (AV) y los costes a lo largo de la vida de los pacientes. Los datos clínicos fueron obtenidos de un análisis del ensayo clínico TRITON-TIMI 38. Los reingresos hospitalarios registrados durante el ensayo en un subestudio de pacientes provenientes de ocho países, (y las subsiguientes rehospitalizaciones fueron modeladas para acumularse más alla del horizonte temporal del ensayo) fueron asignados a grupos relacionados con el diagnóstico españoles para estimar los costes de hospitalización. Resultados: Los costes medios totales del tratamiento con prasugrel y clopidogrel fueron 11.427 € y 10.910 €, respectivamente. El coste medio del fármaco fue 538 € superior para prasugrel frente a clopidogrel, pero los costes de rehospitalización a los 12 meses fueron 79 € menores para prasugrel debido a la reducción en las tasas de revascularización. Los costes de hospitalización más allá de los 12 meses fueron 55 € superiores con prasugrel, debido a la mayor esperanza de vida (+0,071 AV y +0,054 AVACs) asociada a la reducción de la tasa de infartos de miocardio no mortales en el grupo de prasugrel. El coste-efectividad incremental por año de vida y AVAC ganado con prasugrel fue 7.198 € y 9.489 €, respectivamente. Conclusión: Considerando el umbral de disponibilidad a pagar de 30.000 €/ AVAC para España, prasugrel representa una opción coste-efectiva en comparación con clopidogrel en pacientes con SCA sometidos a ICP.

Objective: To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of 12 months treatment of prasugrel compared to clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the Spanish health care system. Methods: A Markov state transition model was developed to estimate health outcomes, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), life years (LY), and costs over patients' lifetimes. Clinical inputs were based on an analysis of the TRITON-TIMI 38 clinical trial. Hospital readmissions captured during the trial in a sub-study of patients from eight countries (and subsequent re-hospitalisations modelled to accrue beyond the time horizon of the trial), were assigned to Spanish diagnosis-related group payment schedules to estimate hospitalisation costs. Results: Mean total treatment costs were €11,427 and €10,910 for prasugrel and clopidogrel respectively. The mean cost of the study drug was €538 higher for prasugrel vs. clopidogrel, but rehospitalisation costs at 12 months were €79 lower for prasugrel due to reduced rates of revascularisation. Hospitalisation costs beyond 12 months were higher with prasugrel by €55, due to longer life expectancy (+0.071 LY and +0.054 QALYs) associated with the decreased nonfatal myocardial infarction rate in the prasugrel group. The incremental cost per life year and QALY gained with prasugrel was €7,198, and €9,489, respectively. Conclusion: Considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000/QALY gained in the Spanish setting, prasugrel represents a cost-effective option in comparison with clopidogrel among patients with ACS undergoing PCI.