COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF EDOXABAN COMPARED WITH OTHER LICENSED NOACS FOR THE PREVENTION OF STROKE AND SYSTEMIC EMBOLIC EVENTS IN THE UK

Author(s)

Claxton L1, Taylor M2, Lewis L2, Alexandre AF3, Harrington AE3, Bakhai A4, Brueggenjuergen B5
1York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, York, UK, 2York Health Economics Consortium, York, UK, 3Daiichi Sankyo Europe, Munich, Germany, 4Royal Free, Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals, London, UK, 5Steinbeis-University-Berlin, Berlin, Germany

OBJECTIVES: This evaluation aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of once-daily edoxaban 60mg (30mg dose-reduced) compared with other licenced non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for prevention of stroke and systemic embolic events among patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in the UK. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to simulate the course of disease and resource utilisation in a hypothetical cohort of patients receiving edoxaban or the other NOACs currently licensed for use in the UK: apixaban, dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

In the absence of head-to-head clinical studies between NOACs, a network meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the relative efficacy and safety of edoxaban compared with all treatments of interest. Where data were available, the analysis was based on patients with CHADS≥2; otherwise, the entire study population was used.

Health outcomes were assessed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Utilities and costs were extracted from the literature and the NHS reference cost database and discounted at 3.5% per annum. Outcomes were evaluated over a lifetime time horizon. The average age of patients entering the model was 72, as in the ENGAGE-AF study.

Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the effect of uncertainty in inputs on the results. RESULTS: Edoxaban was dominant compared with rivaroxaban and dabigatran 110 mg BD. Edoxaban was dominated by apixaban and dabigatran 150 mg BD. Lifetime differences between edoxaban and comparators ranged from £394 to -£787 and 0.08 to -0.08 QALYs. Sensitivity analyses indicate the findings were robust. CONCLUSIONS: Accepting the limitations of modelling with restricted data availability and absent head-to-head trials, this analysis suggests that edoxaban is associated with similar outcomes to the other NOACs in the UK setting. Edoxaban is dominant compared with the most widely prescribed once-daily NOAC, rivaroxaban. Both dabigatran and apixaban are given twice daily, and apixaban has a higher acquisition cost than the other NOACs.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2015-11, ISPOR Europe 2015, Milan, Italy

Value in Health, Vol. 18, No. 7 (November 2015)

Code

PCV126

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

Cardiovascular Disorders

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×