Key result
Universal CYP2C19 genotyping to guide antiplatelet therapy in a theoretical cohort of 1,000 ACS patients was estimated to yield annual savings of roughly $444,852.
Why the study?
Does CYP2C19 genotyping reduce costs in patients with ACS receiving PCI and DAPT?
Does CYP2C19 genotyping reduce costs in patients with ACS receiving PCI and DAPT?
CYP2C19 genotyping to guide antiplatelet therapy in ACS patients undergoing PCI may yield significant annual cost savings by avoiding adverse cardiac events.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support cost savings from genotyping-guided therapy in ACS; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy is an established standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to reduce thrombotic risk. Reduced CYP2C19 activity impairs clopidogrel bio-activation and increases risk of adverse clinical outcomes. Patients with poor and intermediate CYP2C19 metabolizers treated with clopidogrel incur higher cardiovascular event rates, including myocardial infarction, stroke, and stent thrombosis, following ACS than patients with normal CYP2C19 function. Tests are available to identify the CYP2C19 genotype and can be used to support individualization of antiplatelet therapy. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the financial impact of CYP2C19 genotyping in a theoretical cohort of 1,000 patients with ACS, who received percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary stent implantation and were treated with clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor in a managed care setting. METHODS: Differences in overall and average cost per patient were estimated based on the rate of CYP2C19 genotyping in a theoretical cohort of 1,000 patients. Sensitivity analysis was carried out for varying costs, adherence, and the percentage of patients treated according to genotyping results. All clinical event costs were reported in terms of 2012 U.S. dollars. The budget impact analysis used published event rates from primary literature to estimate costs of events analysis for 3 different scenarios: Scenario A, no CYP2C19 genotyping; Scenario B, 50% of patients received CYP2C19 genotyping with appropriate treatment based on genotype; and Scenario C, 100% of patients received CYP2C19 genotyping with appropriate treatment based on genotype. RESULTS: According to this model, there was no change in the market share for the 3 antiplatelet agents in Scenario A. Initial market share for clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor was 93%, 5%, and 2%, respectively; however, use of CYP2C19 genotyping is expected to shift market share from clopidogrel to either prasugrel or ticagrelor. In Scenario B, where 50% of the patients received genotyping, clopidogrel market share was reduced to 83%, while prasugrel increased to 12.1% and ticagrelor increased to 4.9%. In Scenario C, where all patients received genotyping, clopidogrel market share was reduced to 73%, prasugrel increased to 19.3%, and ticagrelor increased to 7.7%. Total estimated cost differences when all possible patients were genotyped included annual savings of roughly $444,852. CONCLUSIONS: Important financial benefits may be realized through use of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy to reserve prasugrel or ticagrelor use for patients with reduced CYP2C19 activity to avoid costs associated with adverse cardiac events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Johnson et al. (2015) studied Acute coronary syndrome (n=1,000). CYP2C19 genotyping vs. No CYP2C19 genotyping was evaluated on Differences in overall and average cost per patient (annual savings of roughly $444,852). Universal CYP2C19 genotyping to guide antiplatelet therapy in a theoretical cohort of 1,000 ACS patients was estimated to yield annual savings of roughly $444,852.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: