Key result
Apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran cost $93,063, $111,465, and $140,557 per additional QALY gained compared with warfarin, making apixaban optimal at a $100,000/QALY threshold.
Why the study?
Are novel oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban) cost-effective compared to warfarin in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation?
Population
Patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation who were eligible for treatment with warfarin
Comparison
Novel oral anticoagulants vs Warfarin therapy
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
Apixaban may be preferred at a $100,000/QALY threshold; leaves open whether NOACs consistently offer value versus warfarin given sensitivity to assumptions.
Are novel oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban) cost-effective compared to warfarin in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation?
Apixaban appears to be the optimal anticoagulation strategy at a $100,000/QALY threshold, but this finding is highly sensitive to efficacy and cost assumptions, suggesting NOACs may not consistently represent good value for money compared to warfarin.
Canestaro et al. (2013) studied newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation. apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran vs. warfarin was evaluated on cost per additional quality-adjusted life year gained. Apixaban, rivaroxaban, and dabigatran cost $93,063, $111,465, and $140,557 per additional QALY gained compared with warfarin, making apixaban optimal at a $100,000/QALY threshold.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: