Thomas S G Sehested1,2, Jenny Bjerre2,3, Seul Ku4, Andrew Chang4, Alison Jahansouz5, Douglas K Owens6,7, Mark A Hlatky3,4, Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert7. 1. Department of Cardiovascular Epidemiology and Research, The Danish Heart Foundation, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. Department of Cardiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California. 4. Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 5. Department of Management Science and Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California. 6. VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. 7. Stanford Health Policy, Centers for Health Policy and Primary Care and Outcomes Research, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Abstract
Importance: In the Canakinumab Anti-inflammatory Thrombosis Outcome Study (CANTOS) trial, the anti-inflammatory monoclonal antibody canakinumab significantly reduced the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels of 2 mg/L or greater. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding canakinumab to standard of care for the secondary prevention of major cardiovascular events over a range of potential prices. Design, Setting, and Participants: A state-transition Markov model was constructed to estimate costs and outcomes over a lifetime horizon by projecting rates of recurrent MI, coronary revascularization, infection, and lung cancer with and without canakinumab treatment. We used a US health care sector perspective, and the base case used the current US market price of canakinumab of $73 000 per year. A hypothetical cohort of patients after MI aged 61 years with an hs-CRP level of 2 mg/L or greater was constructed. Interventions: Canakinumab, 150 mg, administered every 3 months plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), discounted at 3% annually. Results: Adding canakinumab to standard of care increased life expectancy from 11.31 to 11.36 years, QALYs from 9.37 to 9.50, and costs from $242 000 to $1 074 000, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $6.4 million per QALY gained. The price would have to be reduced by more than 98% (to $1150 per year or less) to meet the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. These results were generally robust across alternative assumptions, eg, substantially lower health-related quality of life after recurrent cardiovascular events, lower infection rates while receiving canakinumab, and reduced all-cause mortality while receiving canakinumab. Including a potential beneficial effect of canakinumab on lung cancer incidence improved the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to $3.5 million per QALY gained. A strategy of continuing canakinumab selectively in patients with reduction in hs-CRP levels to less than 2 mg/L would have a cost-effectiveness ratio of $819 000 per QALY gained. Conclusions and Relevance: Canakinumab is not cost-effective at current US prices for prevention of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with a prior MI. Substantial price reductions would be needed for canakinumab to be considered cost-effective.
Importance: In the Canakinumab Anti-inflammatory Thrombosis Outcome Study (CANTOS) trial, the anti-inflammatory monoclonal antibody canakinumab significantly reduced the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels of 2 mg/L or greater. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of adding canakinumab to standard of care for the secondary prevention of major cardiovascular events over a range of potential prices. Design, Setting, and Participants: A state-transition Markov model was constructed to estimate costs and outcomes over a lifetime horizon by projecting rates of recurrent MI, coronary revascularization, infection, and lung cancer with and without canakinumab treatment. We used a US health care sector perspective, and the base case used the current US market price of canakinumab of $73 000 per year. A hypothetical cohort of patients after MI aged 61 years with an hs-CRP level of 2 mg/L or greater was constructed. Interventions: Canakinumab, 150 mg, administered every 3 months plus standard of care compared with standard of care alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), discounted at 3% annually. Results: Adding canakinumab to standard of care increased life expectancy from 11.31 to 11.36 years, QALYs from 9.37 to 9.50, and costs from $242 000 to $1 074 000, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $6.4 million per QALY gained. The price would have to be reduced by more than 98% (to $1150 per year or less) to meet the $100 000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold. These results were generally robust across alternative assumptions, eg, substantially lower health-related quality of life after recurrent cardiovascular events, lower infection rates while receiving canakinumab, and reduced all-cause mortality while receiving canakinumab. Including a potential beneficial effect of canakinumab on lung cancer incidence improved the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to $3.5 million per QALY gained. A strategy of continuing canakinumab selectively in patients with reduction in hs-CRP levels to less than 2 mg/L would have a cost-effectiveness ratio of $819 000 per QALY gained. Conclusions and Relevance: Canakinumab is not cost-effective at current US prices for prevention of recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with a prior MI. Substantial price reductions would be needed for canakinumab to be considered cost-effective.
Authors: Eric D Peterson; David Dai; Elizabeth R DeLong; J Matthew Brennan; Mandeep Singh; Sunil V Rao; Richard E Shaw; Matthew T Roe; Kalon K L Ho; Lloyd W Klein; Ronald J Krone; William S Weintraub; Ralph G Brindis; John S Rumsfeld; John A Spertus Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2010-05-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Paul M Ridker; Jean G MacFadyen; Brendan M Everett; Peter Libby; Tom Thuren; Robert J Glynn Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Dhruv S Kazi; Joanne Penko; Pamela G Coxson; Andrew E Moran; Daniel A Ollendorf; Jeffrey A Tice; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo Journal: JAMA Date: 2017-08-22 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gregg C Fonarow; Anthony C Keech; Terje R Pedersen; Robert P Giugliano; Peter S Sever; Peter Lindgren; Ben van Hout; Guillermo Villa; Yi Qian; Ransi Somaratne; Marc S Sabatine Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Dhruv S Kazi; Andrew E Moran; Pamela G Coxson; Joanne Penko; Daniel A Ollendorf; Steven D Pearson; Jeffrey A Tice; David Guzman; Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-08-16 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Gysèle S Bleumink; Anneke M Knetsch; Miriam C J M Sturkenboom; Sabine M J M Straus; Albert Hofman; Jaap W Deckers; Jacqueline C M Witteman; Bruno H Ch Stricker Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Laura Ospina-Quintero; Julio C Jaramillo; Jorge H Tabares-Guevara; José R Ramírez-Pineda Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 7.561
Authors: Laura A Bosmans; Lena Bosch; Pascal J H Kusters; Esther Lutgens; Tom T P Seijkens Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res Date: 2020-03-28 Impact factor: 4.132