Kaavya Narasimhalu1, Yoong Kwei Ang2,3, Doreen Su Yin Tan2,4, Deidre Anne De Silva5, Kelvin Bryan Tan2,6. 1. Department of Neurology (SGH Campus), National Neuroscience Institute, Outram Road, 169608, Singapore, Singapore. nkaavya@gmail.com. 2. Policy, Research and Evaluation Division, Ministry of Health, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. Khoo Teck Puat Hospital, Singapore, Singapore. 5. Department of Neurology (SGH Campus), National Neuroscience Institute, Outram Road, 169608, Singapore, Singapore. 6. School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic stroke are often treated with clopidogrel monotherapy as part of secondary stroke prevention. The prevalence of loss of function (LOF) mutations in the CYP2C19 gene is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Patients with loss of function (LOF) mutations are at risk for poorer secondary outcomes when prescribed clopidogrel. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy in an Asian population with the aim of prescribing ticagrelor as an alternative to patients with LOF mutations. METHODS: Markov models were developed to look at the cost effectiveness of genetic testing of CYP2C19, with patients who screened positive for LOF alleles being switched to ticagrelor compared to universal clopidogrel treatment. Effect ratios were obtained from the literature and incidence rates and costs were obtained from the national data published by the Singapore Ministry of Health. Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. The primary endpoints were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: The prevalence of the LOF mutations was 61% in the population, with 65% of ethnic Chinese, 60% of ethnic Indian, and 53% of ethnic Malay patients having LOF mutations. Based on this prevalence, the overall ICER of genetic testing was S$33,839/QALY with ICERS of S$30,755/QALY, S$33,177/QALY, and S$41,470/QALY for Chinese, Indians, and Malays, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that it is cost effective to screen for LOF mutations in the CYP2C19 gene in ischemic stroke populations, with ticagrelor as a substitute for clopidogrel in those with LOF mutations.
BACKGROUND:Patients with ischemic stroke are often treated with clopidogrel monotherapy as part of secondary stroke prevention. The prevalence of loss of function (LOF) mutations in the CYP2C19 gene is higher in Asians than in Western populations. Patients with loss of function (LOF) mutations are at risk for poorer secondary outcomes when prescribed clopidogrel. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the cost effectiveness of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy in an Asian population with the aim of prescribing ticagrelor as an alternative to patients with LOF mutations. METHODS: Markov models were developed to look at the cost effectiveness of genetic testing of CYP2C19, with patients who screened positive for LOF alleles being switched to ticagrelor compared to universal clopidogrel treatment. Effect ratios were obtained from the literature and incidence rates and costs were obtained from the national data published by the Singapore Ministry of Health. Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated. The primary endpoints were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: The prevalence of the LOF mutations was 61% in the population, with 65% of ethnic Chinese, 60% of ethnic Indian, and 53% of ethnic Malay patients having LOF mutations. Based on this prevalence, the overall ICER of genetic testing was S$33,839/QALY with ICERS of S$30,755/QALY, S$33,177/QALY, and S$41,470/QALY for Chinese, Indians, and Malays, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that it is cost effective to screen for LOF mutations in the CYP2C19 gene in ischemic stroke populations, with ticagrelor as a substitute for clopidogrel in those with LOF mutations.
Authors: Gregory F Guzauskas; Denise M Boudreau; Kathleen F Villa; Steven R Levine; David L Veenstra Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-04-25 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Thomas M Daly; Carmen M Dumaual; Xin Miao; Mark W Farmen; Reuben K Njau; Dong-Jing Fu; Nancy L Bauer; Sandra Close; Nancy Watanabe; Carsten Bruckner; Paul Hardenbol; Richard D Hockett Journal: Clin Chem Date: 2007-05-17 Impact factor: 8.327
Authors: Michael J Sorich; John D Horowitz; Wassana Sorich; Michael D Wiese; Brita Pekarsky; Jonathan D Karnon Journal: Pharmacogenomics Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 2.533
Authors: Hans-Christoph Diener; Stuart J Connolly; Michael D Ezekowitz; Lars Wallentin; Paul A Reilly; Sean Yang; Denis Xavier; Giuseppe Di Pasquale; Salim Yusuf Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2010-11-06 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Pierre Amarenco; Gregory W Albers; Hans Denison; J Donald Easton; Scott R Evans; Peter Held; Michael D Hill; Jenny Jonasson; Scott E Kasner; Per Ladenvall; Kazuo Minematsu; Carlos A Molina; Yongjun Wang; K S Lawrence Wong; S Claiborne Johnston Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Christophe Vandenbriele; Yi Sun; Maarten Criel; Katrien Cludts; Soetkin Van Kerckhoven; Benedetta Izzi; Thomas Vanassche; Peter Verhamme; Marc F Hoylaerts Journal: Platelets Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 3.862
Authors: Melanie Y Bertram; Jeremy A Lauer; Kees De Joncheere; Tessa Edejer; Raymond Hutubessy; Marie-Paule Kieny; Suzanne R Hill Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2016-09-19 Impact factor: 9.408