Why the study?
Is CYP2C19 genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy cost-effective compared to universal antiplatelet therapy in ACS patients?
Is CYP2C19 genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy cost-effective compared to universal antiplatelet therapy in ACS patients?
Genotype-guided use of new antiplatelet agents (prasugrel and ticagrelor) appears cost-effective in high-risk ACS patients, particularly those undergoing PCI.
Supports cost-effectiveness modeling of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy in ACS; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
INTRODUCTION: Clopidogrel is an antiplatelet agent widely prescribed for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and it is activated by the CYP enzyme system to active metabolite. CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LOF) allele(s) affect the responsiveness of clopidogrel, but not the new antiplatelet agents (prasugrel and ticagrelor). We reviewed the pharmacoeconomic studies on genotype-guided use of new antiplatelet agents. AREAS COVERED: A literature search was conducted between the period of 2000 and 2014. Seven studies including cost-effectiveness and risk-benefit analyses of CYP2C19 genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy in ACS patients were reviewed. Genotype-guided prasugrel was found to be cost-effective when compared with universal antiplatelet therapy in four studies. Three studies showed genotype-guided ticagrelor to be cost-effective in ACS patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and universal ticagrelor to be cost-effective in ACS patients. Drug cost of antiplatelet agents and relative risk of the new antiplatelet versus clopidogrel for clinical events were common influential factors of cost-effectiveness analyses. EXPERT OPINION: All studies in the present review focused on selecting antiplatelet agents for carriers of CYP2C19 LOF allele(s). Cost-effectiveness of genotype-guided use of antiplatelets was demonstrated in high-risk ACS patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: