COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF HIGH-SENSITIVE TROPONIN ASSAYS FOR THE EARLY RULE-OUT OR DIAGNOSIS OF ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION (AMI) IN PEOPLE WITH ACUTE CHEST PAIN- A NICE DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT
Author(s)
Ramaekers BL1, Armstrong N2, Joore MA3, Westwood M4, Whiting P2, Thokala P5, Ross J2, Kleijnen J2, Severens J(6, van Asselt A(7
1Maastricht University Medical Center,, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 2Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd., York, UK, 3Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands, 4Kleijnen Systematic Reviews Ltd, York, UK, 5University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK, 6Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 7University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
OBJECTIVES To assess cost-effectiveness of high sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn) assays for the management of adults presenting with acute chest pain at the emergency department. METHODS An economic model was constructed to estimate lifetime costs and QALYs of five hs-cTn strategies (differing according to manufacturer, timing of the test, number of tests and cutoff point for a positive test result) compared to standard troponin (sTn) testing at presentation and at 10-12 hours, which was considered the reference standard. In the base case, it was assumed that sTn testing had perfect accuracy for diagnosing AMI and only patients with a positive test for sTn were at increased risk for adverse events and would benefit from immediate treatment. In a secondary analysis, a proportion of patients with a positive hs-cTn test and a negative sTn test were at increased risk for adverse events and would benefit from immediate treatment. RESULTS Base case: Strategies considered cost-effective depending upon ICER thresholds were Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI 99th centile (thresholds <£6,597), Beckman Coulter hs-cTnI 99th centile (thresholds £6,597 - £30,042), Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI optimal strategy (thresholds £30,042 - £103,194), and the sTn test (thresholds >£103,194). Secondary analysis: Strategies considered cost-effective were Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI 99th centile (<£12,217), Roche Elecsys hs-cTnT 99th centile (£12,217 - £14,992) and Abbott ARCHITECT hs-cTnI optimal strategy (>£14,992). STn was dominated. Sensitivity/subgroup analyses: Main drivers are: the difference in outcomes between treated and untreated patients, and treatment costs for patients testing false-positive. Hs-cTn testing is more cost-effective in younger age, pre-existing coronary artery disease, and symptom onset <3hrs ago. No testing is only cost-effective when pre-test prevalence is 1%. CONCLUSIONS There is no strong evidence to prefer one hs-cTn testing strategy over another. Results do indicate that hs-cTn testing in general may be cost-effective compared to sTn testing, especially in the secondary analysis.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2014-11, ISPOR Europe 2014, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Value in Health, Vol. 17, No. 7 (November 2014)
Code
PCV100
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis
Disease
Cardiovascular Disorders
Explore Related HEOR by Topic