Key result
Genetic-guided antiplatelet selection is cost-effective versus clopidogrel and prasugrel, but not ticagrelor.
Why the study?
Genetic-guided pharmacotherapy is not recommended in clinical guidelines for coronary artery disease, prompting an evaluation of the extent and quality of evidence from economic evaluations.
Does genetic-guided pharmacotherapy (PGx) testing improve cost-effectiveness compared to non-PGx standard care or clinical risk scoring in patients with or at risk of coronary artery disease?
Systematic Review
Does genetic-guided pharmacotherapy (PGx) testing improve cost-effectiveness compared to non-PGx standard care or clinical risk scoring in patients with or at risk of coronary artery disease?
Economic evaluations generally show genetic-guided pharmacotherapy to stratify antiplatelets or predict CAD risk is cost-effective compared to universal clopidogrel, universal prasugrel, or clinical risk scores, but is not cost-effective compared to universal ticagrelor, highlighting that cost-effectiveness heavily depends on the local standard-of-care comparator.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support PGx-guided antiplatelet selection where clopidogrel or prasugrel predominates; confirms comparator choice drives cost-effectiveness in CAD.
BACKGROUND: Genetic-guided pharmacotherapy (PGx) is not recommended in clinical guidelines for coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to examine the extent and quality of evidence from economic evaluations of PGx in CAD and to identify variables influential in changing conclusions on cost-effectiveness. METHODS AND RESULTS: From systematic searches across 6 databases, 2 independent reviewers screened, included, and rated the methodological quality of economic evaluations of PGx testing to guide pharmacotherapy for patients with CAD. Of 35 economic evaluations included, most were model-based cost-utility analyses alone, or alongside cost-effectiveness analyses of PGx testing to stratify patients into antiplatelets (25/35), statins (2/35), pain killers (1/35), or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (1/35) to predict CAD risk (8/35) or to determine the coumadin doses (1/35). To stratify patients into antiplatelets (96/151 comparisons with complete findings of PGx versus non-PGx), PGx was more effective and more costly than non-PGx clopidogrel (28/43) but less costly than non-PGx prasugrel (10/15) and less costly and less effective than non-PGx ticagrelor (22/25). To predict CAD risk (51/151 comparisons), PGx using genetic risk scores was more effective and less costly than clinical risk score (13/17) but more costly than no risk score (16/19) or no treatment (9/9). The remaining comparisons were too few to observe any trend. Mortality risk was the most common variable (47/294) changing conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluations to date found PGx to stratify patients with CAD into antiplatelets or to predict CAD risk to be cost-effective, but findings varied based on the non-PGx comparators, underscoring the importance of considering local practice in deciding whether to adopt PGx.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lim et al. (2024) conducted a systematic review in Coronary artery disease (CAD) or at risk of CAD. Genetic-guided pharmacotherapy (PGx), primarily CYP2C19 testing for antiplatelet stratification (25/35 studies) and genetic risk scores for CAD risk prediction (8/35 studies) vs. Non-PGx standard care (universal clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor; clinical risk scores, no risk score, or no treatment) was evaluated on Cost-effectiveness (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and net monetary benefit based on quality-adjusted life-years, disability-adjusted life-years, life-years, or total events). Genetic-guided antiplatelet stratification was cost-effective versus clopidogrel (26/43 comparisons) and cost-saving versus prasugrel (10/15), but not cost-effective versus ticagrelor (17/25).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: