Key result
SGLT2 inhibitors and MRAs provided similar clinical benefits in HFrEF, but MRAs were more cost-effective with an ICER of $-172,014.25/QALY in favor of MRAs.
Why the study?
SGLT2 inhibitors are approved for HFrEF, but their cost-effectiveness compared with mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists remains unknown.
Are sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) cost-effective compared to mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRAs) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction?
Meta-Analysis
Yes
Are sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) cost-effective compared to mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRAs) in patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction?
Effect estimate: ICER $-172,014.25/QALY
In a 5-year simulated model of HFrEF patients, MRAs provided similar clinical benefits to SGLT2 inhibitors but were significantly more cost-effective.
Objective: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are approved for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, their cost-effectiveness remains unknown. We aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of SGLT2i versus mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRAs). Methods: Data from the RALES, EPHESUS, EMPHASIS, DAPA-HF, and EMPEROR-Reduced trials were included. We calculated the risk-ratio (RR) for a composite of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (CV death-HHF), all-cause mortality, and heart failure hospitalization (HHF) between MRAs and SGLT2i. A Markov model was developed to simulate the progression of HFrEF over 5 years. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured by cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Results: We observed a similar benefit in CV death-HHF (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.82–1.31), all-cause mortality (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.78–1.06), and HHF (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.84–1.31) between MRAs and SGLT2i. In a 5-year model, no difference in survival was observed between treatments. MRAs were associated with lower cost ($63,135.52 vs. $80,365.31) and more QALYs gained per patient (2.53 versus 2.49) than SGLT2i. The ICER for SGLT2i versus MRAs was $-172,014.25/QALY, in favor of MRAs. Conclusion: MRAs and SGLT2i provided similar benefits; however, MRAs were a more cost-effective treatment than SGLT2i.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guo et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) vs. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) was evaluated on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured by cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (ICER $-172,014.25/QALY). SGLT2 inhibitors and MRAs provided similar clinical benefits in HFrEF, but MRAs were more cost-effective with an ICER of $-172,014.25/QALY in favor of MRAs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: