Key result
Over 5 years, sacubitril/valsartan is projected to reduce hospitalizations by 5.1% and cardiovascular deaths by 7.0% compared to enalapril, yielding societal cost savings despite high initial costs.
Why the study?
The study aimed to estimate the financial and economic impact of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril for treating and preventing hospitalization or rehospitalization due to HFrEF in the Philippines.
Does sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril provide a favorable financial and economic impact for the treatment of HFrEF?
Does sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril provide a favorable financial and economic impact for the treatment of HFrEF?
While sacubitril/valsartan requires a higher initial investment than enalapril for HFrEF treatment in the Philippines, it significantly reduces hospitalizations and deaths and is cost-saving from a societal perspective over 5 years.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
High upfront payer costs for sacubitril/valsartan may constrain HFrEF access in the Philippines; leaves open optimal coverage duration and societal value assessment.
OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to estimate the financial and economic impact of sacubitril/valsartan compared with enalapril for the treatment and prevention of hospitalization/rehospitalization because of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: The budget impact analysis was guided by the Philippine Reference Case and ISPOR's Principles of Good Practice for Budget Impact Analysis. A government-funded healthcare payer perspective and a societal perspective were considered. Data collection was guided by the pathways of disease progression and care. Collection of costing data followed a bottom-up approach. The model was based on a Markov model used in a study in Thailand. RESULTS: Over the next 5 years, there will be 17 625 less hospitalizations (∼5.1% less than enalapril arm) and 7968 less cardiovascular-related deaths (∼7.0% less than enalapril arm). In 5 years, the total cost of treating patients with HFrEF with sacubitril/valsartan at current market coverage and annual growth conditions is ₱15.430 billion, which is ₱11.077 billion higher than fully treating with enalapril only. The total required additional investment with treatment of sacubitril/valsartan compared with the full enalapril arm are ₱407 million (at 30-day coverage), ₱800 million (at 60-day coverage), and ₱1.181 billion (at 90-day coverage). If hospitalizations costs alone are considered, only the 30-day coverage is cost-saving. If a societal perspective is considered, all options are cost-saving where at least ₱4.003 billion is saved by the economy. CONCLUSION: The initial investment required to treat patients with HFrEF with sacubitril/valsartan is high; nevertheless, the year-on-year cost deficit shrinks in favor of investing in sacubitril/valsartan treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leong et al. (2023) studied Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sacubitril/valsartan vs. Enalapril was evaluated on Financial and economic impact (hospitalizations, cardiovascular-related deaths, and costs). Over 5 years, sacubitril/valsartan is projected to reduce hospitalizations by 5.1% and cardiovascular deaths by 7.0% compared to enalapril, yielding societal cost savings despite high initial costs.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: