Public Health Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Empagliflozin (JARDIANCE®) in the Treatment of Patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction in France, Based on the EMPEROR-Preserved Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in the treatment of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) were demonstrated in the EMPEROR-Preserved trial, which showed a 21% reduction in combined risks of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization [hazard ratio (HR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-0.90, p < 0.001] and a 27% reduction in the total number of HF hospitalizations (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.61-0.88, p < 0.001) compared with placebo. On the basis of these results, the present study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin + standard of care (SoC) compared with SoC alone in the treatment of HFpEF. METHODS: A published Markov model was adapted to compare the health and economic outcomes in France, considering a collective perspective, in patients treated with empagliflozin in addition to SoC versus patients treated by SoC alone. The model simulated the intention-to-treat (ITT) population of the trial, transitioning between four mutually exclusive health states representing the quartiles of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS). For each arm, the model estimated (over a lifetime time horizon) the economics and the health outcomes (HF hospitalizations avoided, and life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained) to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). The resources used were derived by pairing the FREnch Survey on HF (FRESH) cohort data to French health insurance claims data, and the utilities were derived on the basis of the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire valued on the French tariff. Both economic and health outcomes were discounted at a 2.5% annual rate. RESULTS: The model predicted that treatment of HFpEF patients with empagliflozin would prevent, for 1000 patients treated, 74 HF hospitalizations and 15 deaths attributable to cardiovascular events, resulting on average in a gain of 1 month in overall survival (7.24 versus 7.16 years with placebo) and 0.11 QALYs (6.14 versus 6.03 with placebo). Empagliflozin costs were partially offset by the cost savings from avoided hospitalizations. The ICERs were €18,597 per life year gained and €13,980 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analyses conducted showed that empagliflozin has a 65% probability to be cost-effective under the €25,000/QALY threshold. CONCLUSIONS: The base-case results showed that empagliflozin is a cost-effective strategy for management of HFpEF, in addition to the impact on public health by preventing HF-hospitalizations and deaths in France. Sensitivity analyses suggest that 65% of simulations are under the €25,000/QALY threshold.