Key result
Platelet function testing-guided P2Y12-inhibitor therapy prevented 93 events compared to general clopidogrel in a 10,000-patient simulation, with an ICER of US$ 46,770.
Why the study?
Does PFT-guided P2Y12-inhibitor therapy improve clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness compared to general clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor in ACS patients undergoing PCI?
Does PFT-guided P2Y12-inhibitor therapy improve clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness compared to general clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor in ACS patients undergoing PCI?
A model-based analysis suggests that PFT-guided P2Y12-inhibitor therapy is more cost-effective than universal prasugrel or ticagrelor while preventing more adverse events than universal clopidogrel in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
PFT-guided P2Y12 selection in ACS PCI shows uncertain clinical-economic value; leaves open need for prospective trials.
Although some observational studies reported that the measured level of P2Y12-inhibition is predictive for thrombotic events, the clinical and economic benefit of incorporating PFT to personalize P2Y12-receptor directed antiplatelet treatment is unknown. Here, we assessed the clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of selecting P2Y12-inhibitors based on platelet function testing (PFT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing PCI. A decision model was developed to analyse the health economic effects of different strategies. PFT-guided treatment was compared with the three options of general clopidogrel, prasugrel or ticagrelor treatment. In the PFT arm, low responders to clopidogrel received prasugrel, while normal responders carried on with clopidogrel. The associated endpoints in the model were cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis and major bleeding. With a simulated cohort of 10,000 patients treated for one year, there were 93 less events in the PFT arm compared to general clopidogrel. In prasugrel and ticagrelor arms, 110 and 86 events were prevented compared to clopidogrel treatment, respectively. The total expected costs (including event costs, drug costs and PFT costs) for generic clopidogrel therapy were US$ 1,059/patient. In the PFT arm, total costs were US$ 1,494, while in the prasugrel and ticagrelor branches they were US$ 3,102 and US$ 3,771, respectively. The incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio (ICER) was US$ 46,770 for PFT-guided therapy, US$ 185,783 for prasugrel and US$ 315,360 for ticagrelor. In this model-based analysis, a PFT-guided therapy may have fewer adverse outcomes than general treatment with clopidogrel and may be more cost-effective than prasugrel or ticagrelor treatment in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Straub et al. (2013) studied Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing PCI (n=10,000). Platelet function testing (PFT)-guided P2Y12-inhibitor therapy vs. General clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor treatment was evaluated on Cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding. Platelet function testing-guided P2Y12-inhibitor therapy prevented 93 events compared to general clopidogrel in a 10,000-patient simulation, with an ICER of US$ 46,770.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: