Key result
Universal ticagrelor use was cost-effective compared with universal clopidogrel use for Chinese ACS patients undergoing PCI, with an ICER of 33,875 yuan per QALY gained.
Why the study?
The cost-effectiveness of CYP2C19 loss-of-function allele-guided antiplatelet therapy compared with universal clopidogrel or ticagrelor was unknown in Chinese ACS patients undergoing PCI.
Does CYP2C19 LOF-guided antiplatelet therapy or universal ticagrelor improve cost-effectiveness compared to universal clopidogrel in Chinese patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Does CYP2C19 LOF-guided antiplatelet therapy or universal ticagrelor improve cost-effectiveness compared to universal clopidogrel in Chinese patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Effect estimate: ICER 33,875 yuan/QALY
In Chinese patients with ACS undergoing PCI, universal ticagrelor use was found to be a cost-effective strategy compared to universal clopidogrel use, whereas CYP2C19 LOF-guided therapy was not as cost-effective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Universal ticagrelor remains cost-effective; modeling leaves open whether CYP2C19-guided selection adds value in Chinese ACS-PCI patients.
Fu et al. (2019) studied Acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Universal ticagrelor use or CYP2C19 LOF-guided therapy vs. Universal clopidogrel use was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (ICER 33,875 yuan/QALY). Universal ticagrelor use was cost-effective compared with universal clopidogrel use for Chinese ACS patients undergoing PCI, with an ICER of 33,875 yuan per QALY gained.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: