Key result
Adding empagliflozin to standard therapy for HFpEF yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $11,292.06 per QALY, making it a cost-effective option in the Chinese healthcare system.
Why the study?
EMPEROR-Preserved demonstrated the efficacy of adding empagliflozin to standard therapy in HFpEF, but the cost-effectiveness of this add-on treatment remained unclear.
Is adding empagliflozin to standard therapy cost-effective for patients with HFpEF from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system?
Is adding empagliflozin to standard therapy cost-effective for patients with HFpEF from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system?
Effect estimate: ICER $11,292.06 per QALY
Absolute Event Rate: 4.81% vs 4.7%
Adding empagliflozin to standard therapy for HFpEF is cost-effective in the Chinese healthcare system, supporting its rational use in this population.
Empagliflozin add-on may support reimbursement decisions in HFpEF; extends EMPEROR-Preserved efficacy with favorable economic modeling.
Background: The Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) is the first randomized controlled trial to provide promising evidence on the efficacy of adding empagliflozin to the standard therapy in patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF), but the cost-effectiveness of add-on empagliflozin treatment remains unclear. Method: A Markov model using data from the EMPEROR-Preserved trial and national database was constructed to assess lifetime costs and utility from a China healthcare system perspective. The time horizon was 10 years and a 5% discount rate was applied. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) against willingness to pay (WTP) threshold was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness. A series of sensitivity analyses was applied to ensure the robustness of the results. Results: Compared to standard therapy, the increased cost of adding empagliflozin from $4,645.23 to $5,916.50 was associated with a quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gain from 4.70 to 4.81, projecting an ICER of $11,292.06, which was lower than a WTP threshold of $12,652.5. Univariate sensitivity analysis revealed that the parameters with the largest impact on ICER were cardiovascular mortality in both groups, followed by the cost of empagliflozin and the cost of hospitalization for heart failure. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that when the WTP threshold was $12,652.5 and $37,957.5, the probability of being cost-effective for adding empagliflozin was 52.7% and 67.6%, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated that the cost of empagliflozin, the cost of hospitalization for heart failure, NYHA functional classes, and time horizon had a greater impact on the ICER. Conclusion: At a WTP threshold of $12,652.5, the add-on empagliflozin treatment for HFpEF was cost-effective in healthcare systems in China, which promoted the rational use of empagliflozin for HFpEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2022) studied Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF). Empagliflozin vs. Standard therapy was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (ICER $11,292.06 per QALY). Adding empagliflozin to standard therapy for HFpEF yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $11,292.06 per QALY, making it a cost-effective option in the Chinese healthcare system.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: