H Shah1, K Gondek. 1. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ridgefield, Connecticut 06877-0368,USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this health economic analysis was to asses the cost-effectiveness of a fixed combination of aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA/ER-DP) or clopidogrel compared with ASA monotherapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. BACKGROUND: The second European Stroke Prevention Study (ASA/ESPS-2), a large-scale clinical trial, demonstrated that a new therapy--a fixed combination of ASA/ER-DP--is more effective than ASA monotherapy for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. METHODS: We used data from ESPS-2 to create a health economic model that estimates the incremental cost and cost-effectiveness of ASA/ER-DP during the 2-year time frame after an ischemic stroke. The model was developed from a payor perspective. The analysis used direct cost estimates for stroke from a Medicare claims database analysis. Efficacy data were obtained from clinical trials to determine the incremental cost per stroke averted for ASA/ER-DP or clopidogrel versus ASA. Sensitivity analyses also were conducted to test the reliability and robustness of the model. RESULTS: The results of the analysis demonstrated that ASA/ER-DP was cost-effective compared with ASA monotherapy for the secondary prevention of stroke, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $28,472. The model remained robust over a range of assumptions and cost estimates. Clopidogrel, however, was not cost-effective compared with ASA (cost per stroke averted, $161,316) in either the base-case analysis or any of the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: ASA/ER-DP thus offers a cost-effective alternative to ASA monotherapy for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this health economic analysis was to asses the cost-effectiveness of a fixed combination of aspirin plus extended-release dipyridamole (ASA/ER-DP) or clopidogrel compared with ASA monotherapy for prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. BACKGROUND: The second European Stroke Prevention Study (ASA/ESPS-2), a large-scale clinical trial, demonstrated that a new therapy--a fixed combination of ASA/ER-DP--is more effective than ASA monotherapy for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke. METHODS: We used data from ESPS-2 to create a health economic model that estimates the incremental cost and cost-effectiveness of ASA/ER-DP during the 2-year time frame after an ischemic stroke. The model was developed from a payor perspective. The analysis used direct cost estimates for stroke from a Medicare claims database analysis. Efficacy data were obtained from clinical trials to determine the incremental cost per stroke averted for ASA/ER-DP or clopidogrel versus ASA. Sensitivity analyses also were conducted to test the reliability and robustness of the model. RESULTS: The results of the analysis demonstrated that ASA/ER-DP was cost-effective compared with ASA monotherapy for the secondary prevention of stroke, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $28,472. The model remained robust over a range of assumptions and cost estimates. Clopidogrel, however, was not cost-effective compared with ASA (cost per stroke averted, $161,316) in either the base-case analysis or any of the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION:ASA/ER-DP thus offers a cost-effective alternative to ASA monotherapy for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke.
Authors: Maarten G Lansberg; Martin J O'Donnell; Pooja Khatri; Eddy S Lang; Mai N Nguyen-Huynh; Neil E Schwartz; Frank A Sonnenberg; Sam Schulman; Per Olav Vandvik; Frederick A Spencer; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Gordon H Guyatt; Elie A Akl Journal: Chest Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 9.410