Key result
Adding dapagliflozin to standard treatment for HFrEF in China was highly cost-effective, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $5,541.00 per QALY compared to standard treatment alone.
Why the study?
The economics and effectiveness of adding dapagliflozin or empagliflozin to standard treatment for patients with HFrEF in China required evaluation.
Does adding dapagliflozin or empagliflozin to standard treatment improve cost-effectiveness in patients with HFrEF in China?
Does adding dapagliflozin or empagliflozin to standard treatment improve cost-effectiveness in patients with HFrEF in China?
Effect estimate: ICER $5,541.00 per QALY
Absolute Event Rate: 3.87% vs 3.64%
Adding dapagliflozin or empagliflozin to standard therapy for HFrEF is highly cost-effective in the Chinese healthcare system.
May support adoption in Chinese HFrEF care; leaves open generalizability beyond modeled assumptions.
Objective: To evaluate the economics and effectiveness of adding dapagliflozin or empagliflozin to the standard treatment for heart failure (HF) for patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in China. Methods: A Markov model was developed to project the clinical and economic outcomes of adding dapagliflozin or empagliflozin to the standard treatment for 66-year-old patients with HFrEF. A cost-utility analysis was performed based mostly on data from the empagliflozin outcome trial in patients with chronic heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced) study and the dapagliflozin and prevention of adverse outcomes in heart failure (DAPA-HF) trial. The primary outcomes were measured via total and incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: In China, compared to the standard treatment, although adding dapagliflozin to the standard treatment in the treatment of HFrEF was more expensive ($4,870.68 vs. $3,596.25), it was more cost-effective (3.87 QALYs vs. 3.64 QALYs), resulting in an ICER of $5,541.00 per QALY. Similarly, adding empagliflozin was more expensive ($5,021.93 vs. $4,118.86) but more cost-effective (3.66 QALYs vs. 3.53 QALYs), resulting in an ICER of $6,946.69 per QALY. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the model in identifying cardiovascular death as a significant driver of cost-effectiveness. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that when the willingness-to-pay was $11,008.07 per QALY, the probability of the addition of dapagliflozin or empagliflozin being cost-effective was 70.5 and 55.2%, respectively. A scenario analysis showed that the cost of hospitalization, diabetes status, and time horizon had a greater impact on ICER. Conclusion: Compared with standard treatments with or without empagliflozin, adding dapagliflozin to the standard treatment in the treatment of HFrEF in China was extremely cost-effective.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2021) studied Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction (HFrEF). Dapagliflozin vs. Standard treatment was evaluated on Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (ICER $5,541.00 per QALY). Adding dapagliflozin to standard treatment for HFrEF in China was highly cost-effective, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $5,541.00 per QALY compared to standard treatment alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: