Key result
First-line quadruple therapy proves cost-effective compared with a stepwise approach in HFrEF.
Why the study?
The cost-effectiveness of first-line pharmacotherapy combinations for adults with chronic HFrEF remains uncertain.
Is first-line quadruple pharmacotherapy cost-effective compared to a stepwise approach in adults with HFrEF?
Is first-line quadruple pharmacotherapy cost-effective compared to a stepwise approach in adults with HFrEF?
Effect estimate: ICER £7699
First-line quadruple pharmacotherapy is highly cost-effective compared to a stepwise approach for treating HFrEF from the perspective of the NHS in England.
BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy combinations have been shown to improve survival and reduce hospitalisations in adults with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF); however, their cost-effectiveness when used as first-line treatment remains uncertain. METHODS: A lifetime cohort Markov model was developed from the perspective of the NHS in England to assess the cost-effectiveness of five first-line pharmacotherapy combinations: (i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and beta-blocker (BB) (NICE-recommended treatment at the time of analysis); (ii) ACEI/ARB, BB and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA); (iii) angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), BB and MRA; (iv) ACEI/ARB, BB, MRA and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i); and (v) ARNI, BB, MRA and SGLT2i. Baseline hospitalisation and mortality rates were informed by real-world data, while treatment effects (HRs) were derived from a review of randomised controlled trials. RESULTS: Among individuals able to tolerate an ACEI, the combination of ACEI, BB, MRA and SGLT2i (cost, £12 124; quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), 5.72) was found to be the most cost-effective first-line treatment option with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £7699.Among individuals unable to tolerate an ACEI, the combination of ARNI, BB, MRA and SGLT2i (cost, £18 950; QALYs, 6.04) was found to be the most cost-effective first-line treatment option with an ICER of £15 821. The next most cost-effective first-line treatment option was the combination of ARB, BB, MRA and SGLT2i (cost, £11 842; QALYs, 5.59). These findings were primarily driven by the greater relative QALY gain of ARNI compared with ARB. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a first-line quadruple pharmacotherapy combination is cost-effective compared with a stepwise approach for treating people with HFrEF, suggesting that wider adoption of early initiation of quadruple pharmacotherapy may improve health outcomes and optimise healthcare resource use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mariani et al. (2026) studied chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). First-line quadruple pharmacotherapy (ACEI/ARB/ARNI, BB, MRA, SGLT2i) vs. Stepwise approach (ACEI/ARB and BB) was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness (Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio) (ICER £7699). First-line quadruple pharmacotherapy was cost-effective compared with a stepwise approach for treating adults with HFrEF, with an ICER of £7699 for ACEI-tolerant patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: