Economic evaluation of irbesartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of hypertension in Greece

Does a Standard Cost-Effectiveness Threshold Exist? The Case of Greece

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review the use of cost-effectiveness (CE) threshold for evaluating pharmacological interventions in Greece.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and ScienceDirect was conducted between January 2009 and June 2022. The data of selected studies were extracted using a relevant form and consequently were synthesized. Qualitative variables were presented with relative frequencies (%) and quantitative variables with median and interquartile range (IQR).

RESULTS

From the 302 identified studies, 83 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Studies were categorized to oncology (26.5%) and a nononcology related (73.5%) based on drug treatment. The most frequently reported outcome associated with CE threshold was the "per quality-adjusted life-year gained." A total of 32.5% of the studies with a reported threshold did not specify the origin of the threshold. From the rest of studies, the vast majority (92.8%) adopted thresholds equal to 1 to 3 times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, whereas the rest similar to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. The median CE threshold was differentiated between oncology (€51 000 [IQR €50 000-€60 000]) and nononcology studies (€34 000 [IQR €30 000-€36 000]; P < .001). In both type of studies, the median CE thresholds were not statistically significantly different among GDP, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, and not specified approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Aligned with other countries where there is no standard CE threshold to promote efficient use of healthcare resources, the most prominent practice in Greece was found to be that of 1 to 3 times the GDP per capita irrespective of type of treatment or outcome studied.

Cost Effectiveness of the First-in-Class ARNI (Sacubitril/Valsartan) for the Treatment of Essential Hypertension in a Chinese Setting

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to model the potential long-term disease progression and pharmacoeconomic value of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of essential hypertension from a Chinese healthcare system perspective.

METHODS

A Markov cohort model with five health states was constructed to simulate the incidence of acute cardiovascular events and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with sacubitril/valsartan compared with allisartan isoproxil and valsartan over a lifetime horizon with an annual cycle. Multivariable risk regression models derived from China-PAR data accompanied by hazard ratios were used to transform the dual mechanism of sacubitril/valsartan to lower blood pressure and left ventricular mass index into long-term fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular risks. Efficacy data were calculated using a network meta-analysis integrated by the results of clinical trials. Healthcare costs were determined from a real-world study and published literature, supplemented by expert opinion. Utilities were derived from literature. Both costs and health outcomes were discounted at 5.0% annually, and prices corresponded to 2021. Model validation, deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of results.

RESULTS

For simulated patients with hypertension, sacubitril/valsartan reduced the rates of myocardial infarction by 6.67% and 6.39%, stroke by 9.38% and 8.98%, and heart failure hospitalization by 9.92% and 9.62% relative to allisartan isoproxil and valsartan, respectively. It was also associated with gains in life expectancy among hypertensive individuals of 0.362-0.382 years. Eventually, lifetime costs per patient were CN¥59,272 (US$9187) for sacubitril/valsartan, CN¥54,783 (US$8492) for allisartan isoproxil, and CN¥56,714 (US$8791) for valsartan; total QALYs were 11.38, 11.24, and 11.25, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was CN¥31,805/QALY (US$4930/QALY) compared with allisartan isoproxil, and CN¥19,247/QALY (US$2983/QALY) compared with valsartan, both of which are below the one time per-capita GDP of CN¥80,976/QALY (US$12,551/QALY) in China. Similar results were obtained in various extensive sensitivity analysis scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

This was the first study to evaluate the cost effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in the treatment of hypertension. Sacubitril/valsartan compares favorably with allisartan isoproxil and valsartan in the Chinese setting, which is mainly due to its higher efficacy resulting in fewer cardiovascular events and ultimately less related mortality over time. The results could inform deliberations regarding reimbursement and access to this treatment in China and may provide reference for facilitating more reasonable and efficient allocation of limited resources in such low- and middle-income countries.

Assessing the Consequences of External Reference Pricing for Global Access to Medicines and Innovation: Economic Analysis and Policy Implications

Background: External reference pricing (ERP) is used to set pharmaceutical prices to improve affordability, but its application may have negative consequences on patient access—thus, equity—across countries and on global innovation. With the United States contemplating ERP, negative effects could be magnified. Our aim: identify and quantify some major consequences of ERP. Research design, methods: Besides relying on databases and ERP modelling, we developed a heart failure case study. 4-step approach: 1) review ERP policies; 2) establish worldwide “price corridor”; 3) quantify patient access and health outcomes impact by ERP; 4) estimate ERP impact on innovation.

Results: Our ERP referencing analysis highlights its perverse effects especially in lower-income countries. As counterstrategies to protect their revenues, manufacturers often implement tight list price corridors or launch avoidance/delays. Consequences include suboptimal patient access—hence, worse outcomes—illustrated by our case study: 500,000 + QALYs health loss. Additionally, the ensuing revenue reduction would likely cause innovation loss by one additional medicine that would have benefitted future patients.

Conclusion: This research provides key insights on potential unintentional consequences of medicine price setting by ERP worldwide and under a new proposal for the United States. Our results can inform stakeholder discussions to improve patient access to innovative medicines globally.

Economic evaluation of a single-pill triple antihypertensive therapy with valsartan, amlodipine, and hydrochlorothiazide against its dual components

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-utility of the first available single-pill triple combination antihypertensive therapy containing valsartan (V), amlodipine (A) and hydrochlorothiazide (H), with each of the same components dual combinations in patients with moderate to severe hypertension.

A Markov model with eight health states was constructed. The short-term effect of antihypertensive treatment on blood pressure was extrapolated through the Hellenic SCORE and Framingham risk equations, estimating the long-term survival and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) saved. Costs and outcomes were evaluated over lifetime, divided into annual cycles and discounted at 3.0 % with 2013 as reference year. The analysis was conducted by the Greek third-party-payer perspective.

The triple combination treatment cost was estimated at €16,525 compared to €15,480 for V/A, €14,125 for V/H and €11,690 for A/H. The QALYs saved with the triple combination were 12.76 vs. 12.64, 12.61 and 12.38 for double combinations respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the triple combination versus V/A and A/H was far lower than the Greek GDP per capita (€8,690/QALY and €12,695/QALY, respectively) and really close for V/H (€16,192/QALY), suggesting V/A/H combination to be cost-effective. Extensive sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. The probability that the triple combination is cost effective was more than 90 % at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €18,000/QALY.

This is the first study to evaluate the cost-utility of a single-pill triple combination. The single-pill V/A/H therapy is a cost-effective antihypertensive choice for the treatment of moderate to severe hypertension, compared to its dual components.

The cost-effectiveness of irbesartan for hypertension

High blood pressure is a very common problem in the adult and elderly population, both in developed and developing countries. A relatively large number of drug classes are available to treat this condition and prevent its complications, which are not only more frequent in the aforementioned patients but also those affected by metabolic syndrome and/or Type 2 diabetes. Irbesartan is an angiotensin-receptor blocker class drug with good antihypertensive efficacy and specific pharmacological characteristics, whose efficacy has been more deeply evaluated in metabolically complex hypertensive patients. In this review, the authors will analyze its effectiveness in preventing or delaying organ damage in hypertensive patients, with a closer look at the economic implications of treating hypertension with irbesartan in the context of available antihypertensive drugs.

Comprehensive overview: efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness of irbesartan

Background

Hypertension represents a major health problem, affecting more than one billion adults worldwide. Irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, is considered to be a highly effective treatment in the management of hypertension. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability profile , and cost-effectiveness of treatment with irbesartan in hypertension.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted using the electronic PubMed and Cochrane Library databases and the Health Economic Evaluations Database of search terms relating to irbesartan efficacy, tolerability, and cost-effectiveness, and the results were utilized.

Results

Findings from the present analysis show that irbesartan either as monotherapy or in combination with other antihypertensive agents can achieve significant reductions in blood pressure, both systolic and diastolic, compared with alternative treatment options. Irbesartan was also found to have a renoprotective effect independent of its blood pressure-lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. Furthermore, irbesartan demonstrated an excellent safety and tolerability profile , with either lower or equal adverse events compared with placebo and other alternative treatments. In terms of economic analyses, compared with other antihypertensive therapy alternatives, irbesartan was found to be a preferred option, that is less costly and more effective.

Conclusion

The evidence indicates that treating patients with hypertension alone or with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy using irbesartan can control hypertension, prolong life, and reduce costs in relation to existing alternatives.

Cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetics in anticoagulation: international differences in healthcare systems and costs

Genotyping patients for CYP2C9 and VKORC1 polymorphisms can improve the accuracy of dosing during the initiation of anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists (coumarin derivatives). The anticipated degree of improvement in the safety of anticoagulation with coumarins through genotyping may vary depending on the quality of patient care, which varies both with and among countries. The management and the cost of anticoagulant care can therefore influence the cost-effectiveness of genotyping within any given country. In this article, we provide an overview of the cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetics-guided dosing of coumarin derivatives. We describe the organization of anticoagulant care in the UK, Sweden, The Netherlands, Greece, Germany and Austria, where a genotype-guided dosing algorithm is currently being investigated as part of the EU-PACT trial. We also explore the costs of anticoagulant care for the treatment of atrial fibrillation in these countries.

Cost-effectiveness of varenicline versus bupropion, nicotine-replacement therapy, and unaided cessation in Greece

BACKGROUND

Varenicline was designed to relieve symptoms of nicotine withdrawal, including cigarette craving, and to block the reinforcing effects of continued nicotine use. The cost-effectiveness of varenicline in some countries has not been studied.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of varenicline to that of bupropion, nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT), and unaided cessation in the Greek health care setting. The analysis takes into account a societal security (third-party payer) perspective.

METHODS

To perform the analyses of the benefits of smoking cessation in terms of smoking-related morbidity, mortality, and associated medical costs, a Markov model was used that simulated the progress of a hypothetical cohort of current smokers making a single attempt to quit smoking at the beginning of the timeframe of the analysis. The robustness of the results was assessed using a series of 1-way sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Varenicline was associated with the potential prevention of 14.1, 14.2, and 35.1 additional cases of the 4 smoking-related diseases incorporated into the model, per 1000 smokers willing to quit, versus bupropion, NRT, and unaided cessation, respectively. Potentially avoided smoking-related deaths with varenicline were estimated at 3.24, 3.26, and 7.5 per 1000 quitters versus the 3 comparators. Varenicline led to a potential gain of 33.78, 33.91, and 83.97 QALYs per 1000 persons willing to make a quit attempt versus the 3 comparators. Varenicline was associated with cost-savings against both active comparators for the lifetime horizon. Overall, the cost per additional quitter with varenicline, considering only the costs of the smoking-cessation strategy, was €2659 (€1015) for a lifetime horizon compared with bupropion (NRT); however, when all direct costs were incorporated into the analysis, varenicline was cost-saving.

CONCLUSION

The findings from the present study suggest that, compared with the widely used treatment options bupropion and NRT, as well as unaided cessation, varenicline may enhance smoking-cessation treatment outcomes while substantially reducing the overall costs of smoking to the health care system.

A cost-utility analysis of hypertension treatment in Greece: assessing the impact of age, sex and smoking status, on outcomes

OBJECTIVES

To assess the cost-utility of hypertension treatment versus a hypothetical 'no-treatment' strategy in Greece.

METHODS

A six-state Markov model simulated the occurrence of major cardiovascular events for hypertensive patients over a 20-year period. Baseline population consisted of a cohort of 1453 patients (46.92% men) that were followed up for a 1-year period, during which health-resource use and clinical characteristics of hypertension were documented. Age, sex and smoking status - specific transition probabilities in the model - were estimated via the HellenicSCORE and Framingham risk equations. The analysis followed a third-party payer perspective.

RESULTS

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of treatment versus no treatment were 3539&OV0556;/quality-adjusted life year (QALY), 3986&OV0556;/QALY, 3957&OV0556;/QALY and 5485&OV0556;/QALY gained for men smokers, men nonsmokers, women smokers and women nonsmokers, respectively. ICERs became more favorable with an increase in the years of treatment and advanced age of treatment initiation across all study groups. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that the base-case scenario results were cost-effective for an implicit 30 000&OV0556;/QALY threshold at 97.4, 95.2, 94.8, and 86% of the 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations for men smokers, men nonsmokers, women smokers and women nonsmokers, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In the case of hypertension, one of the most prevalent and modifiable diseases/risk factors, that is accompanied by large-scale costs, the above analysis demonstrates that treatment is a highly cost-effective intervention that should be further supported at the patient and the system level.

Evolutionary cost analysis of valsartan initiation among patients with hypertension: a time series approach

OBJECTIVES

This study examines the evolutionary impact of valsartan initiation on medical costs.

METHODS

A retrospective time series study design was used with a large, US national commercial claims database for the period of 2004-2008. Hypertensive patients who initiated valsartan between the ages of 18 and 63, and had continuous enrollment for 24-month pre-initiation period and 24-month post-initiation period were selected. Patients' monthly medical costs were calculated based on individual claims. A novel time series model was devised with monthly medical costs as its dependent variables, autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) as its stochastic components, and four indicative variables as its decomposed interventional components. The number of post-initiation months before a cost-offset point was also assessed.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 18,269) had mean age of 53 at the initiation date, and 53% of them were female. The most common co-morbid conditions were dyslipidemia (52%), diabetes (24%), and hypertensive complications (17%). The time series model suggests that medical costs were increasing by approximately $10 per month (p < 0.01) before the initiation, and decreasing by approximately $6 per month (p < 0.01) after the initiation. After the 4th post-initiation month, medical costs for patients with the initiation were statistically significantly lower (p < 0.01) than forecasted medical costs for the same patients without the initiation.

LIMITATIONS

The study has its limitations in data representativeness, ability to collect unrecorded clinical conditions, treatments, and costs, as well as its generalizability to patients with different characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

Commercially insured hypertensive patients experienced monthly medical cost increase before valsartan initiation. Based on our model, the evolutionary impact of the initiation on medical costs included a temporary cost surge, a gradual, consistent, and statistically significant cost decrease, and a cost-offset point around the 4th post-initiation month.