Dong-Jin Kim1, Ho-Sook Kim2,3, Minkyung Oh1, Eun-Young Kim1,4, Jae-Gook Shin5,6. 1. Department of Pharmacology and PharmacoGenomics Research Center, Inje University College of Medicine, 633-165 Gaegum 2-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Pharmacology and PharmacoGenomics Research Center, Inje University College of Medicine, 633-165 Gaegum 2-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea. hosuegi@gmail.com. 3. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, 633-165 Gaegum 2-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea. hosuegi@gmail.com. 4. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, 633-165 Gaegum 2-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea. 5. Department of Pharmacology and PharmacoGenomics Research Center, Inje University College of Medicine, 633-165 Gaegum 2-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea. phshinjg@gmail.com. 6. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Inje University Busan Paik Hospital, 633-165 Gaegum 2-dong, Busan Jin-gu, Busan, Republic of Korea. phshinjg@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although studies assessing the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing for the management of atrial fibrillation, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism have been reported, no publications have addressed genotype-guided warfarin therapy in mechanical heart valve replacement (MHVR) patients or genotype-guided warfarin therapy under the fee-for-service (FFS) insurance system. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing in patients with MHVR under the FFS system from the Korea healthcare sector perspective. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing compared with standard dosing. Estimates of clinical adverse event rates and health state utilities were derived from the published literature. The outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the range of plausible results. RESULTS: In a base-case analysis, genotype-guided warfarin dosing was associated with marginally higher QALYs than standard warfarin dosing (6.088 vs. 6.083, respectively), at a slightly higher cost (US$6.8) (year 2016 values). The ICER was US$1356.2 per QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, there was an 82.7% probability that genotype-guided dosing was dominant compared with standard dosing, and a 99.8% probability that it was cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$50,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: Compared with only standard warfarin therapy, genotype-guided warfarin dosing was cost effective in MHVR patients under the FFS insurance system.
BACKGROUND: Although studies assessing the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing for the management of atrial fibrillation, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism have been reported, no publications have addressed genotype-guided warfarin therapy in mechanical heart valve replacement (MHVR) patients or genotype-guided warfarin therapy under the fee-for-service (FFS) insurance system. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing in patients with MHVR under the FFS system from the Korea healthcare sector perspective. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided warfarin dosing compared with standard dosing. Estimates of clinical adverse event rates and health state utilities were derived from the published literature. The outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the range of plausible results. RESULTS: In a base-case analysis, genotype-guided warfarin dosing was associated with marginally higher QALYs than standard warfarin dosing (6.088 vs. 6.083, respectively), at a slightly higher cost (US$6.8) (year 2016 values). The ICER was US$1356.2 per QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, there was an 82.7% probability that genotype-guided dosing was dominant compared with standard dosing, and a 99.8% probability that it was cost effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of US$50,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: Compared with only standard warfarin therapy, genotype-guided warfarin dosing was cost effective in MHVR patients under the FFS insurance system.
Authors: Gary Tse; Mengqi Gong; Guangping Li; Sunny Hei Wong; William K K Wu; Wing Tak Wong; Leonardo Roever; Alex Pui Wai Lee; Gregory Y H Lip; Martin C S Wong; Tong Liu Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Ye Zhu; Kristi M Swanson; Ricardo L Rojas; Zhen Wang; Jennifer L St Sauver; Sue L Visscher; Larry J Prokop; Suzette J Bielinski; Liewei Wang; Richard Weinshilboum; Bijan J Borah Journal: Genet Med Date: 2019-10-08 Impact factor: 8.822