PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 15, 2012Heart128 citationsOpen Access

Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in UK patients with atrial fibrillation

SSSonja SorensenRGRay GaniPRPaul Robinson

Structured PICO

Is dabigatran etexilate cost-effective compared to warfarin, aspirin, or no therapy for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in UK patients with atrial fibrillation?

P
Population
UK patients with atrial fibrillation, modeled in two cohorts (starting age <80 and ≥80 years)
I
Intervention
Dabigatran etexilate
C
Comparator
Warfarin, aspirin, or no therapy
O
Outcome
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), clinical events, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and total costs over a lifetime horizon

Dabigatran etexilate is likely a cost-effective first-line treatment for stroke prevention in eligible UK patients with atrial fibrillation compared to warfarin.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate, a new oral anticoagulant, versus warfarin and other alternatives for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in UK patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: A Markov model estimated the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate versus warfarin, aspirin or no therapy. Two patient cohorts with AF (starting age of <80 and ≥80 years) were considered separately, in line with the UK labelled indication. Modelled outcomes over a lifetime horizon included clinical events, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: Patients treated with dabigatran etexilate experienced fewer ischaemic strokes (3.74 dabigatran etexilate vs 3.97 warfarin) and fewer combined intracranial haemorrhages and haemorrhagic strokes (0.43 dabigatran etexilate vs 0.99 warfarin) per 100 patient-years. Larger differences were observed comparing dabigatran etexilate with aspirin or no therapy. For patients initiating treatment at ages <80 and ≥80 years, the ICERs for dabigatran etexilate were £4831 and £7090/QALY gained versus warfarin with a probability of cost-effectiveness at £20 000/QALY gained of 98% and 63%, respectively. For the patient cohort starting treatment at ages <80 years, the ICER versus aspirin was £3457/QALY gained and dabigatran etexilate was dominant (ie, was less costly and more effective) compared with no therapy. These results were robust in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This economic evaluation suggests that the use of dabigatran etexilate as a first-line treatment for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism is likely to be cost-effective in eligible UK patients with AF.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Sorensen et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a852c5fb890443775b2ea62https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300646
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Are Cost Benefits of Anticoagulation for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation Underestimated?2005 · 112 citations
  2. 2Meta-analysis: Antithrombotic Therapy to Prevent Stroke in Patients Who Have Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation2007 · 4,829 citations
  3. 3Trends in the prevalence of diagnosed atrial fibrillation, its treatment with anticoagulation and predictors of such treatment in UK primary care2005 · 167 citations
  4. 4Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation: A Canadian payer perspective2011 · 205 citations
  5. 5Treatments for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: A network meta-analysis and indirect comparisons versus dabigatran etexilate2010 · 111 citations