Carlos Martes-Martinez1, Cristian Méndez-Sepúlveda1, Joel Millán-Molina1, Matthew French-Kim2, Heriberto Marín-Centeno3, Giselle C Rivera-Miranda4, José J Hernández-Muñoz5, Jorge Duconge-Soler6. 1. Pharmacy Practice Department, School of Pharmacy, University of Puerto Rico Medical Science Campus, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 2. Student at the Biology Department, University of Houston, Houston, TX. 3. Health Services Administration Department, School of Public Health, University of Puerto Rico Medical Sciences Campus, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 4. VA Caribbean Healthcare System (VACHS), Pharmacy Service, San Juan, Puerto Rico. 5. Pharmacy Practice Department, School of Pharmacy, University of Puerto Rico Medical Science Campus, San Juan, Puerto Rico; Pharmaceutical Sciences Department, College of Pharmacy, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. 6. Pharmaceutical Sciences Department, School of Pharmacy, University of Puerto Rico Medical Science Campus, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-utility of the pharmacogenetic-guided dosing of warfarin (PGx), when compared to the current dosing strategy. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to assess the impact of the genotypingguided warfarin dosing in a hypothetical cohort of patients. The model was based on the percentage of time patients spent within the therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) range (PTTR). PTTR estimates and genotype distribution were derived from a cohort of patients (n = 206) treated in the Veteran Affairs Caribbean Healthcare System (VACHS) and from results of other research study. Costs, utilities and event probability data were obtained from the literature. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the range of plausible results. Willingness to pay was established at $50,000 per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: According to our model, the PGx strategy showed a QALY increase of 0.0021, with an increase in total cost of $272. This corresponds to an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of $127,501, ranging from $95,690 to $148,611. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the ICURs were more sensitive to the cost of genotyping and the effect of genotyping on the PTTR. CONCLUSION: Our model suggests that the warfarin PGx was not superior to the standard of care dosing strategy in terms of cost-utility.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-utility of the pharmacogenetic-guided dosing of warfarin (PGx), when compared to the current dosing strategy. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to assess the impact of the genotypingguided warfarin dosing in a hypothetical cohort of patients. The model was based on the percentage of time patients spent within the therapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) range (PTTR). PTTR estimates and genotype distribution were derived from a cohort of patients (n = 206) treated in the Veteran Affairs Caribbean Healthcare System (VACHS) and from results of other research study. Costs, utilities and event probability data were obtained from the literature. Probabilistic and one-way sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the range of plausible results. Willingness to pay was established at $50,000 per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: According to our model, the PGx strategy showed a QALY increase of 0.0021, with an increase in total cost of $272. This corresponds to an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of $127,501, ranging from $95,690 to $148,611. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the ICURs were more sensitive to the cost of genotyping and the effect of genotyping on the PTTR. CONCLUSION: Our model suggests that the warfarinPGx was not superior to the standard of care dosing strategy in terms of cost-utility.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cost-utility; Pharmacogenomics; Puerto Rico; Warfarin
Authors: Lisa M Meckley; James M Gudgeon; Jeffrey L Anderson; Marc S Williams; David L Veenstra Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2010 Impact factor: 4.981
Authors: Daniel S Budnitz; Daniel A Pollock; Kelly N Weidenbach; Aaron B Mendelsohn; Thomas J Schroeder; Joseph L Annest Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-10-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Jeffrey L Anderson; Benjamin D Horne; Scott M Stevens; Scott C Woller; Kent M Samuelson; Justin W Mansfield; Michelle Robinson; Stephanie Barton; Kim Brunisholz; Chrissa P Mower; John A Huntinghouse; Jeffrey S Rollo; Dustin Siler; Tami L Bair; Stacey Knight; Joseph B Muhlestein; John F Carlquist Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-03-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Elaine Nguyen; Florence Egri; Elizabeth S Mearns; Charles M White; Craig I Coleman Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2016-04-27 Impact factor: 4.705
Authors: Jorge Duconge; Carmen L Cadilla; Andreas Windemuth; Mohan Kocherla; Krystyna Gorowski; Richard L Seip; Kali Bogaard; Jessica Y Renta; Paola Piovanetti; Darrin D'Agostino; Pedro J Santiago-Borrero; Gualberto Ruaño Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2009 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Isa I Valentín; Giselle Rivera; Mariely Nieves-Plaza; Iadelisse Cruz; Jessica Y Renta; Carmen L Cadilla; Juan F Feliu; Richard L Seip; Gualberto Ruaño; Jorge Duconge Journal: P R Health Sci J Date: 2014-09 Impact factor: 0.705