Author(s)
Claassens D1, Vos GJA1, Boersma C2, Bergmeijer TO1, Hermanides RS3, van t Hof AW4, Van der Harst P5, Barbato E6, Morisco C6, Tjon Joe Gin RM7, Asselbergs FW8, Mosterd A9, Herrman JPR10, Dewilde WJ11, Postma M5, Deneer VHM8, Ten Berg JM1
1St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, Netherlands, 2University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, UT, Netherlands, 3Isala Hospital, Zwolle, Netherlands, 4University Medical Center Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands, 5University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands, 6University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy, 7Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, Netherlands, 8University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands, 9Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, Netherlands, 10Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 11Imelda Hospital, Bonheide, Belgium
OBJECTIVES : The POPular Genetics trial demonstrated that a genotype-guided strategy to select antiplatelet therapy in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) compared to universal treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel, resulted in a reduction in bleedings without an increase in the thrombotic risk. The objective of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the genotype-guided strategy. METHODS : In the POPular Genetics trial, STEMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to an intervention or a control arm. In the intervention arm CYP2C19 genetic testing for the *2 and *3 loss-of-function alleles took place. Carriers of a loss-of-function allele were treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel, while noncarriers were treated with clopidogrel. In the control arm patients were treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel. An alongside clinical-trial cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted based on a decision-model with 1000 patients in both groups. A hybrid model, consisting of a 1-year decision tree combined with a 25-years Markov model was developed, to estimate the life-time cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. Outcome measures were costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost per QALY gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to account for the uncertainty around the key parameters. In an exploratory analysis the price for ticagrelor and prasugrel was the same as clopidogrel, to simulate the effect of generic ticagrelor and prasugrel in the future. RESULTS : The genotype-guided strategy resulted in 26.87 QALY gained with cost-savings of €601,807 indicating that the genotype-guided strategy is a cost-saving intervention. The exploratory analysis – keeping the price of antithrombotic therapies at the same price level – resulted in cost-savings of €137,980. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base-case analysis. CONCLUSIONS : Based on the POPular Genetics trial, a genotype-guided strategy compared to universal ticagrelor or prasugrel treatment resulted in favorable cost-effectiveness with QALYs gained and cost-savings.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2020-11, ISPOR Europe 2020, Milan, Italy
Value in Health, Volume 23, Issue S2 (December 2020)
Code
PCV44
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Budget Impact Analysis, Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis, Trial-Based Economic Evaluation
Disease
Cardiovascular Disorders, Drugs, Personalized and Precision Medicine