Literature DB >> 33444193

Cost-effectiveness analysis and budget impact of rivaroxaban compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism.

Lisa A de Jong1, Annette W G van der Velden2, Marinus van Hulst3,4, Maarten J Postma4,5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In the 'Comparison of an Oral Factor Xa Inhibitor With Low Molecular Weight Heparin in Patients With Cancer With Venous Thromboembolism' (SELECT-D) trial, rivaroxaban showed relatively low venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence but higher bleeding compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer. We aim to calculate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of rivaroxaban compared with dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk of recurrent VTE.
SETTING: We built a Markov model to calculate the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective over a 5-year time horizon for the Dutch healthcare setting. PARTICIPANTS: A hypothetical cohort of 1000 cancer patients with VTE entered the model with baseline characteristics based on the SELECT-D trial. INTERVENTION: Six months of treatment with rivaroxaban (15 mg two times per day for first 3 weeks followed by 20 mg once daily) was compared with 6 months of treatment with dalteparin (200 IU/kg daily during month 1 followed by 150 IU/kg daily). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of the cost-effectiveness analysis was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The robustness of the model was evaluated in probabilistic and univariate sensitivity analyses. A budget impact analysis was performed to calculate the total annual financial consequences for a societal perspective in the Netherlands.
RESULTS: In the base case and all scenarios, rivaroxaban were cost-saving while also slightly improving the patient's health, resulting in economically dominant ICERs. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 77.8% and 98.7% of the simulations showed rivaroxaban to be cost-saving and more effective for a 5-year and 6-month time horizon, respectively. Rivaroxaban can save up to €11 326 763 (CI €5 164 254 to €17 363 231) in approximately 8000 cancer patients with VTE per year compared with dalteparin based on a 1-year time horizon.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with rivaroxaban is economically dominant over dalteparin in patients with cancer at risk for recurrent VTE in the Netherlands. The use of rivaroxaban instead of dalteparin can save over €10 million per year, primarily driven by the difference in drug costs. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anticoagulation; health economics; oncology; thromboembolism

Year:  2020        PMID: 33444193     DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Open        ISSN: 2044-6055            Impact factor:   2.692


  3 in total

1.  Modelling the Economic Impact of Reducing Loneliness in Community Dwelling Older People in England.

Authors:  David McDaid; A-La Park
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 2.  New Oral Anticoagulants Open New Horizons for Cancer Patients with Venous Thromboembolism.

Authors:  Kaidireyahan Wumaier; Wenqian Li; Jiuwei Cui
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 4.319

Review 3.  Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: A New Light on an Old Story.

Authors:  Sidrah Shah; Afroditi Karathanasi; Antonios Revythis; Evangelia Ioannidou; Stergios Boussios
Journal:  Diseases       Date:  2021-05-04
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.