Key result
Compared to warfarin, NOACs were associated with annual medical cost reductions of $179 for dabigatran, $89 for rivaroxaban, and $485 for apixaban from a US payer perspective.
Why the study?
Do novel oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) reduce medical costs compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
Population
Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients (based on data from the RE-LY, ROCKET-AF, and ARISTOTLE trials)
Comparison
Novel oral anticoagulants vs Warfarin
Design
Other
Follow-up
1 year
Authors
Loading...
May reduce US payer costs with NOACs versus warfarin in AF; leaves open real-world confirmation before practice change.
Do novel oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) reduce medical costs compared to warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation?
NOACs, particularly apixaban, may reduce non-drug medical costs compared to warfarin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation from a US payer perspective.
Deitelzweig et al. (2012) studied non-valvular atrial fibrillation. NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) vs. warfarin was evaluated on annual medical cost differences. Compared to warfarin, NOACs were associated with annual medical cost reductions of $179 for dabigatran, $89 for rivaroxaban, and $485 for apixaban from a US payer perspective.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: