Author(s)
Hill NR1, Groves L2, Dickerson C3, Ochs A3, Lawton S4, Hurst M1, Pollock KG1, Sugrue D3, Tsang C3, Arden C5, Davies DW6, Martin AC7, Sandler B1, Gordon J3, Farooqui U8, Clifton D9, Mallen C4, Rogers J10, Camm JA11, Cohen A12
1Bristol Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, UK, 2Health Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, CRF, UK, 3Health Economics and Outcomes Research Ltd, Cardiff, UK, 4Keele University, Keele, UK, 5Park Surgery, Chandlers Ford, UK, 6London, London, UK, 7Université de Paris, Paris, France, 8Bristol Myers Squibb, uxbridge, UK, 9Oxford University, Oxford, UK, 10PHASTAR, London, UK, 11St. George’s University of London, London, UK, 12Guy's and St Thomas’ Hospitals, London, UK
OBJECTIVES: The PULsE-AI trial sought to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a machine learning risk prediction algorithm in conjunction with diagnostic testing for identification of undiagnosed atrial fibrillation (AF) in primary care. METHODS: Eligible participants were randomised into intervention and control arms and risk assessed using the AF risk prediction algorithm. Intervention arm participants – identified at high risk of undiagnosed AF – were invited for a 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) and two weeks of home-based ECG monitoring. Intervention arm participants who did not accept the invitation to participate, and control arm participants were managed routinely. Analysis considered the costs associated with intervention implementation (including administrative, clinical contact and device costs) and lifetime treatment and events (stroke, major bleed, myocardial infarction, intracranial haemorrhage) in patients diagnosed with AF compared with lifetime cost of events in undiagnosed patients who did not receive the intervention. Estimated treatment and event costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) were based on the mean of all direct oral anticoagulant therapies. Incremental net monetary benefit (NMB) was calculated based on a willingness to pay threshold of £30,000. RESULTS: Estimated cost per diagnosis in the intervention arm was £947. Despite lower incidence of events in diagnosed patients, estimated lifetime costs were higher compared with no diagnosis, driven by treatment acquisition costs (total intervention and lifetime costs were estimated at £22,943 for a diagnosed patient vs. £12,956 in a patient without diagnosis). However, after accounting for QALY gains (+1.40 years vs. undiagnosed), diagnosis of AF as a result of the trial intervention resulted in an incremental NMB of £31,012 compared with patients remaining undiagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: This health economic impact assessment demonstrates that diagnosis of AF in previously undiagnosed patients via application of this machine learning AF risk prediction algorithm combined with diagnostic testing is cost-effective in a UK primary care setting.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2021-11, ISPOR Europe 2021, Copenhagen, Denmark
Value in Health, Volume 24, Issue 12, S2 (December 2021)
Code
POSC125
Topic
Economic Evaluation, Methodological & Statistical Research
Topic Subcategory
Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Predictive Analytics, Trial-Based Economic Evaluation
Disease
Cardiovascular Disorders, Personalized and Precision Medicine