Costs and effects of enalapril therapy in patients with symptomatic heart failure: an economic analysis of the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) Treatment Trial

The economics of heart failure care

Heart failure (HF) poses a significant economic burden in the US, with costs projected to reach $70 billion by 2030. Cost-effectiveness analyses play a pivotal role in assessing the economic value of HF therapies. In this review, we overview the cost-effectiveness of HF therapies and discuss ways to improve patient access. Based on current costs, guideline directed medical therapies for HF with reduced ejection fraction provide high economic value except for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, which provide intermediate economic value. Combining therapy with the four pillars of medical therapy also has intermediate economic value, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranging from $73,000 to $98,500/ quality adjusted life-years. High economic value procedures include cardiac resynchronization devices, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, and coronary artery bypass surgery. In contrast, advanced HF therapies have previously demonstrated intermediate to low economic value, but newer data appear more favorable. Given the affordability challenges of HF therapies, additional efforts are needed to ensure optimal care for patients. The recent Inflation Reduction Act contains provisions to reform policy pertaining to drug price negotiation and out-of-pocket spending, as well as measures to increase access to existing programs, including the Medicare low-income subsidy. On a patient level, it is also important to encourage patient and physician awareness and discussions surrounding medical costs. Overall, a broad approach to improving available therapies and access to care is needed to reduce the growing clinical and economic morbidity of HF.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

SGLT-2 Inhibitors on Top of Current Pharmacological Treatments for Heart Failure: A Comparative Review on Outcomes and Cost Effectiveness

Heart failure (HF) represents a major global health and economic burden with still unacceptably high morbidity and mortality rates. In recent decades, novel therapeutic opportunities with a significant impact on HF outcomes have been introduced in addition to angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, β-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. These include drugs such as ivabradine, sacubitril-valsartan, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors. The availability of an extremely large pharmacological armamentarium to face this chronic global disease highlights the importance of assessing cost effectiveness to promote sustainable healthcare. In light of the recent approval of SGLT-2 inhibitors for the treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction, including in individuals without type 2 diabetes mellitus, the aim of this review was to provide an updated comparative evaluation of the efficacy and cost effectiveness of different pharmacological treatments for the prevention (stage A) and treatment of asymptomatic (stage B) and symptomatic (stages C-D) left ventricular dysfunction.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Long-term monitoring in primary care for chronic kidney disease and chronic heart failure: a multi-method research programme

Background

Long-term monitoring is important in chronic condition management. Despite considerable costs of monitoring, there is no or poor evidence on how, what and when to monitor. The aim of this study was to improve understanding, methods, evidence base and practice of clinical monitoring in primary care, focusing on two areas: chronic kidney disease and chronic heart failure.

Objectives

The research questions were as follows: does the choice of test affect better care while being affordable to the NHS? Can the number of tests used to manage individuals with early-stage kidney disease, and hence the costs, be reduced? Is it possible to monitor heart failure using a simple blood test? Can this be done using a rapid test in a general practitioner consultation? Would changes in the management of these conditions be acceptable to patients and carers?

Design

Various study designs were employed, including cohort, feasibility study, Clinical Practice Research Datalink analysis, seven systematic reviews, two qualitative studies, one cost-effectiveness analysis and one cost recommendation.

Setting

This study was set in UK primary care.

Data sources

Data were collected from study participants and sourced from UK general practice and hospital electronic health records, and worldwide literature.

Participants

The participants were NHS patients (Clinical Practice Research Datalink: 4.5 million patients), chronic kidney disease and chronic heart failure patients managed in primary care (including 750 participants in the cohort study) and primary care health professionals.

Interventions

The interventions were monitoring with blood and urine tests (for chronic kidney disease) and monitoring with blood tests and weight measurement (for chronic heart failure).

Main outcome measures

The main outcomes were the frequency, accuracy, utility, acceptability, costs and cost-effectiveness of monitoring.

Results

Chronic kidney disease: serum creatinine testing has increased steadily since 1997, with most results being normal (83% in 2013). Increases in tests of creatinine and proteinuria correspond to their introduction as indicators in the Quality and Outcomes Framework. The Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation had 2.7% greater accuracy (95% confidence interval 1.6% to 3.8%) than the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation for estimating glomerular filtration rate. Estimated annual transition rates to the next chronic kidney disease stage are ≈ 2% for people with normal urine albumin, 3–5% for people with microalbuminuria (3–30 mg/mmol) and 3–12% for people with macroalbuminuria (> 30 mg/mmol). Variability in estimated glomerular filtration rate-creatinine leads to misclassification of chronic kidney disease stage in 12–15% of tests in primary care. Glycaemic-control and lipid-modifying drugs are associated with a 6% (95% confidence interval 2% to 10%) and 4% (95% confidence interval 0% to 8%) improvement in renal function, respectively. Neither estimated glomerular filtration rate-creatinine nor estimated glomerular filtration rate-Cystatin C have utility in predicting rate of kidney function change. Patients viewed phrases such as ‘kidney damage’ or ‘kidney failure’ as frightening, and the term ‘chronic’ was misinterpreted as serious. Diagnosis of asymptomatic conditions (chronic kidney disease) was difficult to understand, and primary care professionals often did not use ‘chronic kidney disease’ when managing patients at early stages. General practitioners relied on Clinical Commissioning Group or Quality and Outcomes Framework alerts rather than National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance for information. Cost-effectiveness modelling did not demonstrate a tangible benefit of monitoring kidney function to guide preventative treatments, except for individuals with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 60–90 ml/minute/1.73 m2, aged < 70 years and without cardiovascular disease, where monitoring every 3–4 years to guide cardiovascular prevention may be cost-effective. Chronic heart failure: natriuretic peptide-guided treatment could reduce all-cause mortality by 13% and heart failure admission by 20%. Implementing natriuretic peptide-guided treatment is likely to require predefined protocols, stringent natriuretic peptide targets, relative targets and being located in a specialist heart failure setting. Remote monitoring can reduce all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalisation, and could improve quality of life. Diagnostic accuracy of point-of-care N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide (sensitivity, 0.99; specificity, 0.60) was better than point-of-care B-type natriuretic peptide (sensitivity, 0.95; specificity, 0.57). Within-person variation estimates for B-type natriuretic peptide and weight were as follows: coefficient of variation, 46% and coefficient of variation, 1.2%, respectively. Point-of-care N-terminal prohormone of B-type natriuretic peptide within-person variability over 12 months was 881 pg/ml (95% confidence interval 380 to 1382 pg/ml), whereas between-person variability was 1972 pg/ml (95% confidence interval 1525 to 2791 pg/ml). For individuals, monitoring provided reassurance; future changes, such as increased testing, would be acceptable. Point-of-care testing in general practice surgeries was perceived positively, reducing waiting time and anxiety. Community heart failure nurses had greater knowledge of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance than general practitioners and practice nurses. Health-care professionals believed that the cost of natriuretic peptide tests in routine monitoring would outweigh potential benefits. The review of cost-effectiveness studies suggests that natriuretic peptide-guided treatment is cost-effective in specialist settings, but with no evidence for its value in primary care settings.

Limitations

No randomised controlled trial evidence was generated. The pathways to the benefit of monitoring chronic kidney disease were unclear.

Conclusions

It is difficult to ascribe quantifiable benefits to monitoring chronic kidney disease, because monitoring is unlikely to change treatment, especially in chronic kidney disease stages G3 and G4. New approaches to monitoring chronic heart failure, such as point-of-care natriuretic peptide tests in general practice, show promise if high within-test variability can be overcome.

Future work

The following future work is recommended: improve general practitioner–patient communication of early-stage renal function decline, and identify strategies to reduce the variability of natriuretic peptide.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015017501, CRD42019134922 and CRD42016046902.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Portugal

Objectives: This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in patients with symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).Methods: We used a previously developed Markov model calibrated with patient-level data from the PARADIGM-HF trial, adapted to the Portuguese setting. The model considers two health states (alive or dead) and uses regression analyzes to estimate hospitalizations and deaths over time. A panel of experts estimated resource consumption in the outpatient setting. To estimate resource consumption with hospitalizations, the National Health Service Diagnosis Related Groups database was used. Unit costs were based on national legislation, and on the Infomed database. The model considers a societal perspective, a time horizon of 30-years, and a 5% annual discount rate. Sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of results.Results: Sacubitril/valsartan increases life expectancy by 0.5 life-years, corresponding to 0.4 incremental quality adjusted life-years (QALY) versus enalapril. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is 22,702€/QALY. Sensitivity analysis shows that results are robust, but sensitive to the parameter estimates of the cardiovascular survival curve.Conclusion: Sacubitril/valsartan is a cost-effective therapeutic option in the treatment of Portuguese patients with HFrEF and translate into significant health gains and increased life expectancy versus the current standard of care.

Heart failure and right ventricular pacing - how to avoid the need for cardiac resynchronization therapy

INTRODUCTION

Heart failure (HF) is a common finding in patients with pacemakers implanted for bradycardia, with cross-sectional and longitudinal studies contributing to the growing consensus that right ventricular pacing can cause adverse cardiac remodeling and left ventricular systolic dysfunction increasing the risk of hospitalization and death. An unselected approach using cardiac resynchronization therapy from the time of first implant in patients with heart block has produced equivocal results. Contemporary research has therefore begun to focus on the stratification of patients' risk of pacemaker-associated impairment to permit focused, personalized management.

AREAS COVERED

The present review will describe the incidence and relevance of HF in the pacemaker population and discuss current management options for such patients.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

At present there are few contemporary data to guide the identification of patients with and at risk of pacemaker-associated cardiac remodeling and dysfunction. Emphasis must be placed on precise and personalized treatment approaches which currently remain under-investigated due to a number of challenges, for example, small sample sizes, limited clarity on programmed settings, and short follow-up periods.

Quality of health economic evaluations for the ACC/AHA stable ischemic heart disease practice guideline: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recently published a rigorous framework to guide integration of economic data into clinical guidelines. We assessed the quality of economic evaluations in a major ACC/AHA clinical guidance report.

METHODS

We systematically identified cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of RCTs cited in the ACC/AHA 2012 Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. We extracted: (1) study identifiers; (2) parent RCT information; (3) economic analysis characteristics; and (4) study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument (QHES).

RESULTS

Quality scores were categorized as high (≥75 points) or low (<75 points). Of 1,266 citations in the guideline, 219 were RCTs associated with 77 CEAs. Mean quality score was 81 (out of 100) and improved over time, though 29.9% of studies were low-quality. Cost-per-QALY was the most commonly reported primary outcome (39.0%). Low-quality studies were less likely to report study perspective, use appropriate time horizons, or address statistical and clinical uncertainty. Funding was overwhelmingly private (83%). A detailed methodological assessment of high-quality studies revealed domains of additional methodological issues not identified by the QHES.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluations of RCTs in the 2012 ACC/AHA ischemic heart disease guideline largely had high QHES scores but methodological issues existed among "high-quality" studies. Because the ACC/AHA has generally been more systematic in its integration of scientific evidence compared to other professional societies, it is likely that most societies will need to proceed more cautiously in their integration of economic evidence.

[Management of anesthesia in endovascular interventions]

Cardiovascular diseases are one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in Germany. In these patients, the high-risk profile necessitates an interdisciplinary and multimodal approach to treatment. Endovascular interventions and vascular surgery have become established as an important element of this strategy in the past; however, the different anatomical localizations of pathological vascular alterations make it necessary to use a wide spectrum of procedural options and methods; therefore, the requirements for management of anesthesia are variable and necessitate a differentiated approach. Endovascular procedures can be carried out with the patient under general or regional anesthesia (RA); however, in the currently available literature there is no evidence for an advantage of RA over general anesthesia regarding morbidity and mortality, although a reduction in pulmonary complications could be found for some endovascular interventions. Epidural and spinal RA procedures should be carefully considered with respect to the risk-benefit ratio and consideration of the recent guidelines on anesthesia against the background of the current study situation and the regular use of therapy with anticoagulants. The following article elucidates the specific characteristics of anesthesia management as exemplified by some selected endovascular interventions.

Medical interventions for treating anthracycline-induced symptomatic and asymptomatic cardiotoxicity during and after treatment for childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

Anthracyclines are frequently used chemotherapeutic agents for childhood cancer that can cause cardiotoxicity during and after treatment. Although several medical interventions in adults with symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction due to other causes are beneficial, it is not known if the same treatments are effective for childhood cancer patients and survivors with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of medical interventions on anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer patients or survivors with the effect of placebo, other medical interventions, or no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 8), MEDLINE/PubMed (1949 to September 2015), and EMBASE/Ovid (1980 to September 2015) for potentially relevant articles. In addition, we searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings of the International Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the American Society of Hematology (ASH), the International Conference on Long-Term Complications of Treatment of Children & Adolescents for Cancer, and the European Symposium on Late Complications from Childhood Cancer (from 2005 to 2015), and ongoing trial databases (the ISRCTN Register, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Register, and the trials register of the World Health Organization (WHO); all searched in September 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing the effectiveness of medical interventions to treat anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity with either placebo, other medical interventions, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed the study selection. One review author performed the data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments, which another review author checked. We performed analyses according to the guidelines in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

In the original version of the review we identified two RCTs; in this update we identified no additional studies. One trial (135 participants) compared enalapril with placebo in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic anthracycline-induced cardiac dysfunction. The other trial (68 participants) compared a two-week treatment of phosphocreatine with a control treatment (vitamin C, adenosine triphosphate, vitamin E, oral coenzyme Q10) in leukaemia patients with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Both studies had methodological limitations.The RCT on enalapril showed no statistically significant differences in overall survival, mortality due to heart failure, development of clinical heart failure, and quality of life between treatment and control groups. A post-hoc analysis showed a decrease (that is improvement) in one measure of cardiac function (left ventricular end-systolic wall stress (LVESWS): -8.62% change) compared with placebo (+1.66% change) in the first year of treatment (P = 0.036), but not afterwards. Participants treated with enalapril had a higher risk of dizziness or hypotension (risk ratio 7.17, 95% confidence interval 1.71 to 30.17) and fatigue (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.013).The RCT on phosphocreatine found no differences in overall survival, mortality due to heart failure, echocardiographic cardiac function, and adverse events between treatment and control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only one trial evaluated the effect of enalapril in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction. Although there is some evidence that enalapril temporarily improves one parameter of cardiac function (LVESWS), it is unclear whether it improves clinical outcomes. Enalapril was associated with a higher risk of dizziness or hypotension and fatigue. Clinicians should weigh the possible benefits with the known side effects of enalapril in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.Only one trial evaluated the effect of phosphocreatine in childhood cancer patients with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Limited data with a high risk of bias showed no significant difference between phosphocreatine and control treatments on echocardiographic function and clinical outcomes.We did not identify any RCTs or CCTs studying other medical interventions for symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer patients or survivors.High-quality studies should be performed.

Estimating the payoffs from cardiovascular disease research in Canada: an economic analysis

BACKGROUND

Investments in medical research can result in health improvements, reductions in health expenditures and secondary economic benefits. These "returns" have not been quantified in Canada. Our objective was to estimate the return on cardiovascular disease research funded by public or charitable organizations.

METHODS

Our primary outcome was the internal rate of return on cardiovascular disease research funded by public or charitable sources. The internal rate of return is the annual monetary benefit to the economy for each dollar invested in cardiovascular disease research. Calculation of the internal rate of return involved the following: measuring expenditures on cardiovascular disease research, estimating the health gains accrued from new treatments for cardiovascular disease, determining the proportion of health gains attributable to cardiovascular disease research and the time lag between research expenditures and health gains, and estimating the spillovers from public- or charitable-sector investments to other sectors of the economy.

RESULTS

Expenditures by public or charitable organizations on cardiovascular disease research from 1981 to 1992 amounted to $392 million (2005 dollars). Health gains associated with new treatments from 1994 to 2005 (13-yr lag) amounted to 2.2 million quality-adjusted life-years. We calculated an internal rate of return of 20.6%.

CONCLUSION

Canadians obtain relatively high health and economic gains from investments in cardiovascular disease research. Every $1 invested in cardiovascular disease research by public or charitable sources yields a stream of benefits of roughly $0.21 to the Canadian economy per year, in perpetuity.

Cost-effectiveness of heart failure therapies

Heart failure (HF) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Management of HF involves accurate diagnosis and implementation of evidence-based treatment strategies. Costs related to the care of patients with HF have increased substantially over the past 2 decades, partly owing to new medications and diagnostic tests, increased rates of hospitalization, implantation of costly novel devices and, as the disease progresses, consideration for heart transplantation, mechanical circulatory support, and end-of-life care. Not surprisingly, HF places a huge burden on health-care systems, and widespread implementation of all potentially beneficial therapies for HF could prove unrealistic for many, if not all, nations. Cost-effectiveness analyses can help to quantify the relationship between clinical outcomes and the economic implications of available therapies. This Review is a critical overview of cost-effectiveness studies on key areas of HF management, involving pharmacological and nonpharmacological clinical therapies, including device-based and surgical therapeutic strategies.

Incremental cost-effectiveness of guideline-directed medical therapies for heart failure

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to quantify the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), beta-blocker (BB), and aldosterone antagonist (AldA) therapies for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).

BACKGROUND

There are evidence-based, guideline-directed medical therapies for patients with HFrEF, but the incremental cost-effectiveness of these therapies has not been well studied using contemporary data.

METHODS

A Markov model with lifetime horizon and two states, dead or alive, was created. We compared HFrEF patients treated with diuretic agents alone to three treatment arms: 1) ACEI therapy alone; 2) ACEI+BB; and 3) ACEI+BB+AldA. Sequential therapy was also analyzed. HF hospitalizations and mortality rates were based on representative studies. Costs of medications and inpatient and outpatient care were accounted for.

RESULTS

Treatment with ACEI and ACEI+BB strictly dominated treatment with diuretics only (cost-saving). The greatest gains in quality-adjusted life-years occurred when all 3 guideline-directed medications were provided. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ACEI+BB+AldA versus ACEI+BB and ACEI+BB versus ACEI was <$1,500 per quality-adjusted life-year. The cost-savings in the ACEI and ACEI+BB cohorts compared to that with diuretics alone were $444 and $33, respectively. Assuming lower treatment costs and lower hospitalization rates in the ACEI+BB+AldA arm resulted in greater cost-savings. Even in the most unfavorable situations, the ICER was <$10,000 per life-year gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis demonstrates that medical treatment of HFrEF is highly cost-effective and may even result in cost-savings. Greater efforts to ensure optimal adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF are warranted.

Incorporation of economic evidence in the Dutch guideline 'cardiovascular risk management'

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The consideration of economic evidence in guideline development may be particularly important in health care management when different (drug) therapies show similar efficacy on clinical endpoints, such as in cardiovascular diseases. This article investigates to what extent the Dutch guideline 'cardiovascular risk management' (2006) considers cost-effectiveness and budget impact according to the most recent economic evidence.

METHOD

We carried out a systematic review of economic evaluations on cholesterol-lowering drugs and antihypertensives followed by an assessment of guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

The guideline does not consider the most recent economic evidence but does consider cost-effectiveness based on economic evaluations performed in conjunction with clinical trials. Their conclusions are largely in agreement with the most recent economic evidence. An innovative aspect in the guideline is the application of a budget impact analysis to take accessibility and affordability constraints into account when considering cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the most recent economic evidence, the guideline could be improved by more firmly formulating recommendations in favour of cost-effective drug therapies (simvastatin, pravastatin and low-dose diuretics) to stimulate compliance to the guideline in clinical practice.

Medical interventions for treating anthracycline-induced symptomatic and asymptomatic cardiotoxicity during and after treatment for childhood cancer

BACKGROUND

Anthracyclines are frequently used chemotherapeutic agents for childhood cancer that can cause cardiotoxicity during and after treatment. Although several medical interventions in adults with symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction due to other causes are beneficial, it is not known if the same treatments are effective for childhood cancer patients and survivors with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of medical interventions on anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer patients or survivors with the effect of placebo, other medical interventions or no treatment.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2011, issue 1), MEDLINE/PubMed (1949 to May 2011) and EMBASE/Ovid (1980 to May 2011) for potentially relevant articles. We additionally searched reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings and ongoing trial databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing the effectiveness of medical interventions to treat anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity with either placebo, other medical interventions or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed the study selection. One review author performed the data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments which were checked by another review author.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified two RCTs. One trial (135 patients) compared enalapril with placebo in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic anthracycline induced cardiac dysfunction. The other trial (68 patients) compared a two-week treatment of phosphocreatine with a control treatment (vitamin C, ATP, vitamin E, oral coenzyme Q10) in leukaemia patients with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Both studies had methodological limitations.The RCT on enalapril showed no (statistically) significant differences in overall survival, mortality due to heart failure, development of clinical heart failure and quality of life between treatment and control group. A post-hoc analysis showed a decrease (i.e. improvement) in one measure of cardiac function (left ventricular end systolic wall stress (LVESWS): -8.62% change) compared with placebo (+1.66% change) in the first year of treatment (P = 0.036), but not afterwards. Patients treated with enalapril had a higher risk of dizziness or hypotension (RR 7.17, 95% CI 1.71 to 30.17) and fatigue (Fisher's exact test, P = 0.013).The RCT on phosphocreatine found no differences in overall survival, mortality due to heart failure, echocardiographic cardiac function and adverse events between treatment and control group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For the effect of enalapril in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic cardiac dysfunction, only one RCT is available. Although there is some evidence that enalapril temporarily improves one parameter of cardiac function (LVESWS), it is unclear whether it improves clinical outcomes. Enalapril was associated with a higher risk of dizziness or hypotension and fatigue. Clinicians should weigh the possible benefits with the known side-effects of enalapril in childhood cancer survivors with asymptomatic anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity.For the effect of phosphocreatine in childhood cancer patients with anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity, only one RCT is available. Limited data with a high risk of bias showed no significant difference between phosphocreatine and control treatment on echocardiographic function and clinical outcomes.We did not identify any RCTs or CCTs studying other medical interventions for symptomatic or asymptomatic cardiotoxicity in childhood cancer patients or survivors.High-quality studies should be performed.

Decision-analytic models to simulate health outcomes and costs in heart failure: a systematic review

Chronic heart failure (CHF) is a critical public health issue with increasing effect on the healthcare budgets of developed countries. Various decision-analytic modelling approaches exist to estimate the cost effectiveness of health technologies for CHF. We sought to systematically identify these models and describe their structures. We performed a systematic literature review in MEDLINE/PreMEDLINE, EMBASE, EconLit and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry using a combination of search terms for CHF and decision-analytic models. The inclusion criterion required 'use of a mathematical model evaluating both costs and health consequences for CHF management strategies'. Studies that were only economic evaluations alongside a clinical trial or that were purely descriptive studies were excluded. We identified 34 modelling studies investigating different interventions including screening (n = 1), diagnostics (n = 1), pharmaceuticals (n = 15), devices (n = 13), disease management programmes (n = 3) and cardiac transplantation (n = 1) in CHF. The identified models primarily focused on middle-aged to elderly patients with stable but progressed heart failure with systolic left ventricular dysfunction. Modelling approaches varied substantially and included 27 Markov models, three discrete-event simulation models and four mathematical equation sets models; 19 studies reported QALYs. Three models were externally validated. In addition to a detailed description of study characteristics, the model structure and output, the manuscript also contains a synthesis and critical appraisal for each of the modelling approaches. Well designed decision models are available for the evaluation of different CHF health technologies. Most models depend on New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes or number of hospitalizations as proxy for disease severity and progression. As the diagnostics and biomarkers evolve, there is the hope for better intermediate endpoints for modelling disease progression as those that are currently in use all have limitations.

The impact of disease severity on EQ-5D and SF-6D utility discrepancies in chronic heart failure

OBJECTIVES

To compare EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities across groups of chronic heart failure (CHF) patients with varying levels of disease severity.

METHODS

A consecutive sample (N = 251) of CHF patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery were surveyed. Disease severity was proxied via a self-assessment scale, the EQ-VAS and the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI); however, validity was demonstrated only by the latter. Association and level of agreement between instruments in DASI-based severity groups were estimated with Pearson's r and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. Paired-samples t test was used to identify significant differences. In a linear regression model, the DASI was used as an anchor of disease severity to identify a potential "crossover" point between EQ-5D and SF-6D utilities.

RESULTS

EQ-5D and SF-6D strongly correlated over the entire sample (r = 0.647, P < 0.001); however, their agreement was moderate (ICC = 0.484, P < 0.001). In the less severe DASI groups (i.e. higher functional capacity) EQ-5D was significantly higher than SF-6D (P < 0.001) and differences constituted minimally important differences (MIDs). Contrarily, in the more severe groups SF-6D was predominantly higher than EQ-5D. The regression model indicated a utility crossover point at 0.722 and predicted that individuals with a utility score less than this would score higher on the SF-6D than on the EQ-5D, and vice versa. The DASI score at crossover was calculated at 31.94.

CONCLUSIONS

In subgroups of patients differing in CHF severity according to the DASI, mean EQ-5D and SF-6D indices differed significantly. Contrarily, in socio-demographic and clinical groups, these utility differences were not directly evident. According to the evidence, comparisons based on severity classification via a valid disease-specific external instrument may provide insight on instrument choice in cost-utility analyses.

Potential impact of optimal implementation of evidence-based heart failure therapies on mortality

BACKGROUND

Although multiple therapies have been shown to lower mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, their application in clinical practice has been less than ideal. To date, empiric estimation of the potential benefits that could be gained from eliminating these existing treatment gaps with optimal implementation has not been quantified.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria for each evidence-based HF therapy, the estimated frequency of use/nonuse of specific treatments, the case fatality rates, and the risk reductions due to treatment were obtained from published sources. The numbers of deaths prevented or postponed because of each guideline-recommended therapy and overall were determined.

RESULTS

Among patients with HF with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in the United States (n = 2,644,800), the number eligible but not currently treated ranged from 139,749 for hydralazine/isorbide dinitrate to 852,512 for implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The comparative number of deaths that could potentially be prevented per year with optimal implementation of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor antagonist is 6,516; β-blockers, 12,922; aldosterone antagonists, 21,407; hydralazine/isorbide dinitrate, 6,655; cardiac resynchronization therapy, 8,317; and implantable cardioverter defibrillators, 12,179. If these treatment benefits were additive, optimal implementation of all 6 therapies could potentially prevent 67,996 deaths a year.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial number of HF deaths in this country could potentially be prevented by optimal implementation of evidence-based therapies. These data may underscore the importance of performance improvement efforts to translate evidence-based therapy to routine clinical practice so as to reduce contemporary HF mortality.

The analysis of multinational cost-effectiveness data for reimbursement decisions: a critical appraisal of recent methodological developments

Evidence produced by multinational trial-based cost-effectiveness studies is often used to inform decisions concerning the adoption of new healthcare technologies. A key issue relating to the use of this type of evidence is the extent to which trial-wide economic results are applicable to every single country participating in the study. We consider what role cost-effectiveness analysis alongside multinational trials should have in assisting reimbursement decisions at jurisdiction and national levels. Using the proposed framework as a benchmark to evaluate their relative pros and cons, we then describe and review the statistical approaches used in the multinational trial-based cost-effectiveness literature. The results of the review are used to define the desirable characteristics a statistical method for the analysis of data collected from different jurisdictions should have in order to be consistent with the proposed framework. It is argued that Bayesian hierarchical models that use both patient- and country-level information are the most appropriate tool to analyse multinational trial-based cost-effectiveness data and facilitate the between-country generalizability assessment of the study findings. The merits of each approach are discussed, highlighting problems and limitations, in order to identify areas of future research.

A cost-saving strategy for inpatient management of advanced decompensated heart failure patients: the Cardiomyopathy Unit

BACKGROUND

This article analyzes the relative costs and revenues of the Tufts Medical Center Cardiomyopathy Unit (CMU), a recent innovation for grouping and managing advanced decompensated heart failure patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We selected a retrospective sample of all patients with the primary diagnosis of heart failure, primary procedure of pulmonary artery catheterization, and with no other hospitalization procedures, admitted to Tufts Medical Center between 2000 and 2006. Regression models were used to estimate the cost for the intervention group and controls. Propensity analysis was used to test for selection bias in the comparison groups. We identified 114 hospitalizations meeting these criteria. Patients in the CMU group were well-balanced compared with controls with respect to demographic and clinical variables. Estimated direct medical costs for CMU and control groups were $11,817 (95% CI $7678-$16,106) and $17,236 (95% CI $11,199-$23,493), respectively. A similar pattern of cost differentials was displayed among propensity-matched sample groups. Net revenue was $12,609 (95% CI $9578-$16,845) and $15,627 (95% CI $11,871-$20,877) in the CMU and control groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The inpatient CMU may offer a lower cost and higher contribution margin alternative for the management of advanced heart failure patients requiring hemodynamic monitoring without other major inpatient procedures.

Candesartan in heart failure: assessment of reduction in mortality and morbidity (CHARM) and resource utilization and costs in Italy

Chronic heart failure (HF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality particularly in the elderly and a growing healthcare burden in Italy. The objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of candesartan cilexetil, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) for the treatment of HF. A pre-specified economic evaluation was conducted on resource utilization (cardiovascular drug treatment, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular hospital admission, cardiovascular procedures/operations) prospectively collected alongside the CHARM program, a series of parallel randomized clinical trials comparing candesartan with placebo (standard therapy) in patients with NYHA Class II-IV HF: CHARM-Alternative (LVEF < or =40% patients not receiving ACE inhibitors because of previous intolerance); CHARM-Added (LVEF < or =40% patients currently receiving ACE inhibitors); or CHARM-Preserved (LVEF > or =40% patients). The primary outcome for the component trials was the composite of cardiovascular death or worsening hospital admission for HF and of the overall program all-cause mortality. Adjunctive treatment with candesartan in CHARM-Alternative and CHARM-Added led to clinical benefits and to either cost-savings or a small additional cost, depending on the trial. The less certain clinical benefit in CHARM-Preserved was obtained at modest extra cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated to range from euro713 per life year gained for CHARM-Alternative to dominant for CHARM-Added and the pooled reduced LVEF trials.

Economic burden of heart failure in the elderly

Heart failure (HF) ranks among the most costly chronic diseases in developed countries. At present these countries devote 1-2% of all healthcare expenditures towards HF. In the US, these costs are estimated at $US30.2 billion for 2007. The burden of HF is greatest among the elderly, with 80% of HF hospitalizations and 90% of HF-related deaths in this cohort. As a result, approximately three-quarters of the resources for HF care are consumed by elderly patients. As demographic shifts increase the number of elderly individuals in both developed and developing nations, the resources devoted to HF care will likely further increase. Hospitalization accounts for roughly two-thirds of HF costs, but procedures, outpatient visits and medications also consume significant financial resources. HF also adversely impacts patient quality of life, and these relevant effects may not be captured in pure cost analyses. The cost effectiveness of several pharmacological interventions has been explored. In general, neurohormonal antagonists used for outpatient treatment of chronic HF are relatively cost effective, in part by reducing hospitalizations. Because HF poses such an enormous financial burden, efficient resource allocation for its management is a major societal and governmental challenge. In order to make informed decisions and allocate resources for HF care rationally, detailed data regarding costs and resource use will be essential. Further studies are needed to examine the impact of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on costs and resource use in elderly individuals with HF.

[Hypertension and cardiac failure]

Arterial hypertension is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity with a worldwide prevalence of 26%. Aging increases the incidence of arterial hypertension. Arterial hypertension is the prime example for a chronic disease with asymptomatic beginning, creeping course and fatal outcome. Arterial hypertension is a major cardiovascular risk factor and leads to vascular as well as myocardial manifestations: coronary artery disease, hypertensive microvascular disease, concentric left ventricular hypertrophy as well as perivascular and interstitial fibrosis. In the late stages of the disease, hypertrophy and cardiac failure develop. Arterial hypertension is the leading cause of coronary artery disease and cardiac failure, and coronary artery disease is the cause of heart failure in 50% of cases. Various non-invasive and invasive procedures are available for screening and follow-up. The primary therapeutic target is to reverse cardiac manifestations of arterial hypertension using specific therapeutic algorithms as well as lowering blood pressure. This article covers the pathophysiology of arterial hypertension and cardiac failure, clinical symptoms, diagnostic options and therapeutical goals as well as medicinal options.

Analytic considerations in economic evaluations of multinational cardiovascular clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

The growing number of economic evaluations that use data collected in multinational clinical trials raises numerous questions regarding their execution and interpretation. Although recommendations for conducting economic evaluations have been widely disseminated, relatively little guidance has been given for conducting economic evaluations alongside clinical trials, particularly multinational trials.

METHODS

Building on a literature review that was conducted in preparation for an expert workshop, we evaluated a subset of methodological issues related to conducting economic evaluations alongside multinational clinical trials.

RESULTS

We found wide variation in the types of costs included as part of the analyses and in the methods used to assign costs to hospitalization events. Furthermore, we found that the extrapolation of costs and survival outcomes beyond the trial period is an inconsistent practice and is often not dependent on whether a survival benefit was observed in the trial or on the epidemiology or practice patterns in the country to which the findings are directed.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the limited sample size precluded a quantitative analysis of trial characteristics and their associations with the methodologies employed, our findings highlight the need for more guidance to analysts regarding the execution of economic evaluations using data from multinational clinical trials. As the research community grapples with the complexities of methodological and logistical issues involved in multinational economic evaluations, the development of a standardized format to report the basic methodological characteristics of such studies would help to improve transparency and comparability for other analysts and decision-makers.

Cost-effectiveness of hospital pay-for-performance incentives

One increasingly popular mechanism for stimulating quality improvements is pay-for-performance, or incentive, programs. This article examines the cost-effectiveness of a hospital incentive system for heart-related care, using a principal-agent model, where the insurer is the principal and hospitals are the agents. Four-year incentive system costsfor the payer were dollar 22,059,383, composed primarily of payments to the participating hospitals, with approximately 5 percent in administrative costs. Effectiveness is measured in stages, beginning with improvements in the processes of heart care. Care process improvements are converted into quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, with reference to literatures on clinical effectiveness and survival. An estimated 24,418 patients received improved care, resulting in a range of QALYs from 733 to 1,701, depending on assumptions about clinical effectiveness. Cost per QALY was found to be between dollar 12,967 and dollar 30,081, a level well under consensus measures of the value of a QALY.

A Comparison of the Effects of Carvedilol and Metoprolol on Well-Being, Morbidity, and Mortality (the “Patient Journey”) in Patients With Heart Failure

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to investigate the loss of well-being, in terms of life-years, overall and in patients randomized to metoprolol versus carvedilol in the Carvedilol Or Metoprolol European Trial (COMET).

BACKGROUND

The ultimate objectives of treating patients with heart failure are to relieve suffering and prolong life. Although the effect of treatment on mortality is usually described in trials, the effects on patient well-being throughout the trials' courses are rarely reported.

METHODS

A total of 3,029 patients randomized in the COMET study were included in the analysis. "Patient journey" was calculated by adjusting days alive and out of hospital over four years using a five-point score completed by the patient every four months, adjusted according to the need for intensification of diuretic therapy. Scores ranged from 0% (dead or hospitalized) to 100% (feeling very well).

RESULTS

Over 48 months, 17% of all days were lost through death, 1% through hospitalization, 23% through impaired well-being, and 2% through the need for intensified therapy. Compared with metoprolol, carvedilol was associated with fewer days lost to death, with no increase in days lost due to impaired well-being or days in hospital. The "patient journey" score improved from a mean of 54.8% (SD 26.0) to 57.4% (SD 26.3%) (p < 0.0068).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite treatment with beta-blockers, heart failure remains associated with a marked reduction in well-being and survival. Loss of quality-adjusted life-years through death and poor well-being seemed of similar magnitude over four years, and both were much larger than the loss that could be attributed to hospitalization.

Candesartan cilexetil: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in chronic heart failure and hypertension

The addition of candesartan cilexetil (Atacand, Amias, Blopress, Kenzen, Ratacand) to standard therapy for chronic heart failure (CHF) provided important clinical benefits at little or no additional cost in France, Germany and the UK, according to a detailed economic analysis focusing on major cardiovascular events and prospectively collected resource-use data from the CHARM-Added and CHARM-Alternative trials in patients with CHF and left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction. Results of a corresponding cost-effectiveness analysis showed that candesartan cilexetil was either dominant over placebo or was associated with small incremental costs per life-year gained, depending on the country and whether individual trial or pooled data were used. Preliminary data from a US cost-effectiveness analysis based on CHARM data also showed favourable results for candesartan cilexetil. Two cost-effectiveness analyses of candesartan cilexetil in hypertension have been published, both conducted in Sweden. Data from the SCOPE trial in elderly patients with hypertension, which showed a significant reduction in nonfatal stroke with candesartan cilexetil-based therapy versus non-candesartan cilexetil-based treatment, were incorporated into a Markov model and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of euro12 824 per QALY gained was calculated (2001 value). Another modelled cost-effectiveness analysis of candesartan cilexetil was based on the ALPINE trial, in which the incidence of new-onset diabetes was significantly lower in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension who were randomised to candesartan cilexetil (with or without felodipine) than among those who received hydrochlorothiazide (with or without atenolol). Although candesartan cilexetil was dominant over hydrochlorothiazide, the ALPINE cost-effectiveness analysis relied on a small number of clinical events and did not evaluate the incremental cost of candesartan cilexetil per life-year or QALY gained. In conclusion, despite some inherent limitations, economic analyses incorporating CHARM data and conducted primarily in Europe have shown that candesartan cilexetil appears to be cost effective when added to standard CHF treatment in patients with CHF and compromised LV systolic function. The use of candesartan cilexetil as part of antihypertensive therapy in elderly patients with elevated blood pressure was also deemed to be cost effective in a Swedish analysis, primarily resulting from a reduced risk of nonfatal stroke (as shown in the SCOPE study); however, the generalisability of results to other contexts has not been established. Cost-effectiveness analyses comparing candesartan cilexetil with ACE inhibitors or other angiotensin receptor blockers in CHF or hypertension are lacking, and results reported for candesartan cilexetil in a Swedish economic analysis of ALPINE data focusing on outcomes for diabetes require confirmation and extension.

What is the most cost-effective strategy to screen for left ventricular systolic dysfunction: natriuretic peptides, the electrocardiogram, hand-held echocardiography, traditional echocardiography, or their combination?

AIMS

To assess the screening characteristics and cost-effectiveness of screening for left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) in community subjects.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1392 members of the general public and 928 higher risk subjects were randomly selected from seven community practices. Attending subjects underwent an ECG, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) serum levels, and traditional echocardiography (TE). A total of 533 consecutive subjects underwent hand-held echocardiography (HE). The screening characteristics and cost-effectiveness (cost per case of LVSD diagnosed) of eight strategies to predict LVSD (LVSD <45% on TE) were compared. A total of 1205 subjects attended. Ninety six per cent of subjects with LVSD in the general population had identifiable risk factors. All screening strategies gave excellent negative predictive value. Screening high-risk subjects was most cost-effective, screening low-risk subjects least cost-effective. TE screening was the least cost-effective strategy. NTproBNP screening gave similar cost savings to ECG screening; HE screening greater cost-savings, and HE screening following NTproBNP or ECG pre-screening the greatest cost-savings, costing approximately 650 Euros per case of LVSD diagnosed in high-risk subjects (63% cost-savings vs.TE).

CONCLUSION

Thus several different modalities allow cost-effective community-based screening for LVSD, especially in high-risk subjects. Such programmes would be cost-effective and miss few cases of LVSD in the community.

Economic impact of the reduced incidence of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure treated with enalapril

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of heart failure (HF) is linked to embolic stroke and exacerbation of HF. The rate of new-onset AF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and mild to moderate HF enrolled in the SoLVD trials was significantly lower with enalapril than with placebo (5.4% vs 24% over 2.9 years, P < .0001). The objective of this study was to predict economic benefits over 5 and 10 years of reduced AF incidence in patients receiving enalapril for the treatment of HF from a Canadian third-party payer perspective.

METHODS

Consequences of reduced incidence of AF in enalapril-treated patients were modeled using a Markov model. Patients were assigned to 1 health state: no AF, AF, poststroke, or death, and moved from one state to the other according to published incidence rates. It was assumed that most patients with AF would receive warfarin for stroke prevention. Resource use and costs were mostly retrieved from published Canadian studies.

RESULTS

Reduced incidence of AF resulted in savings of 382 dollars and 525 dollars per patient treated with enalapril over 5 and 10 years, respectively, which stemmed mainly from reduced AF hospitalization and less need for warfarin and amiodarone. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that enalapril becomes more cost saving as the baseline risk for embolic stroke in patients with AF increases and the use of warfarin prophylaxis decreases.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced incidence of AF with enalapril leads to significant clinical and economic advantages on top of the already well-established benefits of enalapril for patients with HF.

Heart Failure Drug Utilization Patterns for Medicaid Patients Before and After a Heart Failure-Related Hospitalization

The authors examined heart failure (HF) drug utilization patterns in Medicaid patients before and after a HF-related hospitalization. This was a retrospective claims analysis of Kansas Medicaid beneficiaries hospitalized for HF between July 1, 2000, and March 31, 2001. HF drugs were tracked 6 months prior and 6 months following the admission. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor doses were compared with target ranges. The cohort of 135 patients had a mean age of 53.6 years and was predominantly female (66.7%) and Caucasian (70.4%) with a high prevalence of cardiovascular comorbidities. Before hospitalization, less than one third of patients were receiving ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, beta blockers, digoxin, or vasodilators. Following hospitalization, increased utilization was observed for beta blockers, digoxin, and angiotensin receptor blockers, but overall usage remained low. ACE inhibitors and vasodilator use remained constant. ACE-inhibitor doses were below target ranges before and after hospitalization. In this Medicaid cohort, HF-related hospitalizations did not lead to improved HF therapy.

Conducting economic evaluations alongside multinational clinical trials: toward a research consensus

Demand for economic evaluations in multinational clinical trials is increasing, but there is little consensus about how such studies should be conducted and reported. At a workshop in Durham, North Carolina, we sought to identify areas of agreement about how the primary findings of economic evaluations in multinational clinical trials should be generated and presented. In this paper, we propose a framework for classifying multinational economic evaluations according to (a) the sources of an analyst's estimates of resource use and clinical effectiveness and (b) the analyst's method of estimating costs. We review existing studies in the cardiology literature in the context of the proposed framework. We then describe important methodological and practical considerations in conducting multinational economic evaluations and summarize the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Finally, we describe opportunities for future research. Delineation of the various approaches to multinational economic evaluation may assist researchers, peer reviewers, journal editors, and decision makers in evaluating the strengths and limitations of particular studies.

A multicenter disease management program for hospitalized patients with heart failure

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of proven therapies, outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF) remain poor. In this 2-stage, multicenter trial, we evaluated the effect of a disease management program on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with HF.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In Stage 1, a pharmacist or nurse assessed each patient and made recommendations to the physician to add or adjust angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and other HF medications. Before discharge (Stage 2), patients were randomized to a patient support program (PSP) (education about HF, self-monitoring, adherence aids, newsletters, telephone hotline, and follow-up at 2 weeks, then monthly for 6 months after discharge) or usual care. In Stage 1 (766 patients) ACE inhibitor use increased from 58% on admission to 83% at discharge (P < .0001), and the daily dose (in enalapril equivalents) increased from 11.3 +/- 8.8 mg to 14.5 +/- 8.8 mg (P < .0001). In Stage 2 (276 patients) there was no difference in ACE inhibitor adherence, but a reduction in cardiovascular-related emergency room visits (49 versus 20, P = .030), hospitalization days (812 versus 341, P = .003), and cost of care (2,531 Canadian dollars less per patient) in favor of the PSP.

CONCLUSION

Simple interventions can improve ACE inhibitor use and patient outcomes.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy in patients with heart failure enrolled in a managed care organization: effect on costs and probability of hospitalization

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor therapy on risk of hospitalization and resource utilization in patients with heart failure enrolled in a managed care organization.

DESIGN

Retrospective medical and pharmacy claims analysis.

PATIENTS

One thousand five hundred seventy-three patients with heart failure enrolled in a managed care organization.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Medical and pharmacy claims from January 1, 1997-December 31, 1999, from a managed care organization covering approximately 350,000 individuals were analyzed. Patients aged 35 years or older with a diagnostic code for heart failure and 18 months of continuous eligibility were selected. From this group (1573 patients), two cohorts were selected based on exposure to an ACE inhibitor. Dependent variables of interest were all-cause hospitalization and total direct medical costs during the 12-month study period. A logistic regression model and an ordinary least-squares model adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and concomitant drug therapy were used to analyze the risk of all-cause hospitalization and total direct medical costs, respectively. Therapy with an ACE inhibitor for 180 days was associated with a decreased risk of all-cause hospitalization (odds ratio 0.65, p<0.0001) and lower total costs (mean dollars 2397, p<0.001) compared with no ACE inhibitor therapy.

CONCLUSION

In patients with a diagnosis of heart failure, exposure to ACE inhibitor therapy is associated with fewer hospitalizations and lower total costs than no ACE inhibitor exposure.

Multinational economic evaluation of valsartan in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT)

BACKGROUND

The Valsartan Heart Failure Trial (Val-HeFT) compared valsartan versus placebo in 5010 patients taking prescribed background therapy for New York Heart Association class II to IV heart failure. Valsartan reduced the risk of heart failure hospitalization and improved clinical signs and symptoms of heart failure. We sought to compare resource use, costs, and health outcomes among patients taking prescribed therapy for heart failure and randomly assigned to receive valsartan or placebo.

METHODS

Measures of resource use were based on data collected during the trial. Unit cost estimates were collected from individual countries and converted to 1999 US dollars. Total costs were estimated for hospitalizations, inpatient and outpatient physician services, ambulance transportation, deaths outside the hospital, and outpatient cardiovascular medications.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 23 months. Mean costs for heart failure hospitalizations were 423 dollars lower among patients receiving valsartan (95% CI, -706 to -146). Mean total costs were 9008 dollars for patients receiving valsartan and 8464 dollars for patients receiving placebo, a net incremental cost of 545 dollars (95% CI, -149 to 1148), including the cost of valsartan. There was an overall reduction in total costs of 929 dollars (95% CI, -3243 to 1533) among patients not receiving an ACE inhibitor at baseline but a slight increase in costs of 334 dollars (95% CI, -497 to 1199) among those receiving an ACE inhibitor without a beta-blocker and a 1246 dollars increase (95% CI, 54 to 2230) in patients receiving both an ACE inhibitor and a beta-blocker at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Valsartan provided clinical benefits at a mean incremental cost of 285 dollars per year during the trial. In patients not taking ACE inhibitors, valsartan was economically attractive, increasing survival while reducing or marginally increasing overall costs.

Economic endpoints in clinical trials

Healthcare decision makers are increasingly requesting information on the cost and cost-effectiveness of new medicines at the time of product launch. In order to provide this information, data on healthcare resource utilization and, in some cases, costs, may be collected in clinical trials. In this paper, we discuss some of the issues statisticians need to address when it is appropriate to include these economic endpoints in the trial. Several design issues are discussed, including the alternative types of and methods for collecting economic endpoint data, sample size and generalizability. Alternative approaches in the analysis of resource utilization, cost and cost-effectiveness are also presented. Finally, several of the analytic approaches are applied to actual data from a clinical trial.

Economic effects of beta-blocker therapy in patients with heart failure

PURPOSE

Studies suggest that beta-blockers improve outcomes in heart failure patients and may be cost saving to society. However, many heart failure patients are not treated with beta-blockers. Economic incentives facing hospitals, physicians, payers, and patients may not encourage treatment adoption. We assessed the economic effects of beta-blocker therapy from various perspectives: societal, Medicare, hospital, physician, and patient.

METHODS

A Markov model of heart failure progression over 5 years was developed. Transition probabilities and the effect of beta-blockers on mortality and hospitalization were based on clinical trial data. Estimates of hospital costs and reimbursement were obtained from the Duke University Medical Center. Physician fees were based on the Medicare fee schedule.

RESULTS

Beta-blocker therapy increased survival by 0.3 years per patient and reduced societal costs by US dollars 3959 per patient over 5 years. Medicare costs declined by US dollars 6064 per patient, due primarily to lower hospitalization rates. Unless heart failure admissions could be replaced with other hospitalizations that generated an equal or greater revenue above variable cost, hospital revenue would be negatively affected. Physician revenue from treating heart failure patients would also decline. Patient costs increased with beta-blocker use (US dollars 2113 over 5 years).

CONCLUSION

Beta-blocker therapy improves the clinical outcomes of heart failure patients and is cost saving to society and Medicare. However, hospitals and physicians have no clear financial incentives to support increased beta-blocker use. Changes in practice patterns could be encouraged by linking reimbursement with evidence-based care and covering patients' medication costs.

Design and analysis of unit cost estimation studies: How many hospital diagnoses? How many countries?

We evaluated three questions that commonly arise when unit costing exercises for multinational trials are conducted: (1). In countries where investigators plan to collect hospital unit cost estimates for a selected set of diagnoses, how should one estimate unit costs for the remaining diagnoses observed in the trial for which cost data were not collected? (2). For how many hospital diagnoses should estimates be obtained? (3). For how many countries should they be obtained? We addressed these questions using unit cost data collected in four western European countries and three relative value measures from the US Medicare diagnosis-related group (DRG) payment system. We found that the arithmetic mean length of stay from the US DRG payment system was a good predictor of unit costs in four countries in Europe. We also found that the imputation error decreased as the number of hospital diagnoses and countries sampled increased, but that the rate of reduction in error shrank. Finally, we found that - given the existence of a reliable method for cost imputation - from a pure information standpoint, it is better to obtain estimates for fewer hospital diagnoses from more countries than the reverse.

Doxorubicin cardiotoxicity: prevention of congestive heart failure with serial cardiac function monitoring with equilibrium radionuclide angiocardiography in the current era

BACKGROUND

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is among the most serious toxicities of doxorubicin, a potent cancer chemotherapeutic agent. Serial left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) monitoring during doxorubicin therapy for preventing CHF was proposed over 20 years ago. The current utility and cost-effectiveness of this approach in the present era are not known.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Clinical and follow-up data of 265 patients with cancer (age, 53 +/- 14 years; 76% women) undergoing doxorubicin chemotherapy with serial equilibrium radionuclide angiocardiography (ERNA) monitoring (> or =2 studies) were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with a normal baseline LVEF (> or =50%) and a 10% or greater point fall in LVEF to a final value of less than 50% during doxorubicin therapy were considered "at risk" for CHF (n = 41). Over 679 +/- 426 days of follow-up, 7 patients (2.6%) had CHF develop and 90 (34%) died (all cancer-related deaths, with none due to CHF). A comparison of "at-risk" (n = 41 [15%]) and "low-risk" (n = 224 [85%]) groups showed a higher incidence of CHF (12% vs 0.9%, P <.0001), lower baseline LVEF (58% +/- 8% vs 64% +/- 8%, P <.0001), lower value for the lowest LVEF (42% +/- 8% vs 57% +/- 7%, P <.0001), and higher rate of cancer-related deaths (59% vs 29%, P =.0003) in the former despite similar cumulative doxorubicin dose (304 +/- 124 mg/m(2) vs 284 +/- 110 mg/m(2), P = not significant). There were no differences in age, gender, cancer type, and co-morbidity. Cost analysis showed the overall cost of ERNA studies to be lower than the 1-year cost of caring for additional cases of CHF that would potentially be prevented by routine LVEF monitoring.

CONCLUSIONS

An incipient fall in LVEF detected on serial ERNA during doxorubicin therapy provides an appropriate and cost-effective approach for predicting and preventing impending CHF. Use of this approach was associated with a low incidence of CHF (2.6%) and no CHF-related mortality in this study.

Vasopeptidase inhibitor reduces inhospital costs for patients with congestive heart failure: results from the IMPRESS trial. Inhibition of Metallo Protease by BMS-186716 in a Randomized Exercise and Symptoms Study in Subjects With Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

The Inhibition of Metallo Protease by BMS-186716 in a Randomized Exercise and Symptoms Study in Subjects With Heart Failure (IMPRESS) clinical trial randomized patients with congestive heart failure to a daily regimen of either omapatrilat or lisinopril. At 24 weeks, patients randomized to omapatrilat had a significant reduction in the combined end point of death, hospitalization, or discontinuation of study drug for worsening heart failure when compared with patients randomized to lisinopril. They also had significantly fewer serious cardiac adverse events.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to determine the economic consequences of the lower event rates of patients who were given omapatrilat.

METHODS

Economic outcomes (major hospitalizations and their associated medical costs) were compared between treatment groups and assessed by use of the societal perspective. Hospitalization information was obtained from the IMPRESS trial's standardized case report and serious adverse event forms. Hospital costs were evaluated by means of assigning each hospital admission a diagnosis-related group and an average cost for physician and hospital services. Emergency department visits were included only when they were made for worsening heart failure and were assigned costs equivalent to the average hospital and physician Medicare reimbursement for these visits in Duke University Medical Center's heart failure program. Drug costs were not assessed.

RESULTS

Although the typical patient in both treatment groups was event-free, there was a trend toward a greater number of hospitalizations in the patients given lisinopril than in the patients given omapatrilat (P =.07). Differences in the distribution of cardiac hospitalizations between patients given lisinopril and patients given omapatrilat were significant (P =.03). There was a trend toward lower medical costs at 24 weeks in patients given omapatrilat versus patients given lisinopril ($1930 vs $2002, P =.09). Considering only cardiac medical costs, this trend toward reduced medical costs was significant ($1240 vs $1442, P =.03).

CONCLUSIONS

At 24 weeks, patients with heart failure treated with omapatrilat had fewer hospitalizations and lower medical costs than patients treated with lisinopril. However, drug treatment costs were not available for this analysis.

Underutilisation of ACE inhibitors in patients with congestive heart failure

Congestive heart failure (CHF) is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality, and is the only major cardiovascular disease increasing in prevalence. Despite abundant evidence to support their efficacy and cost-effectiveness, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors are sub-optimally used in patients with CHF. This paper reviews the evidence for the sub-optimal use of ACE inhibitors in patients with CHF, the factors contributing to this, and its implications for health systems. A systematic review of all articles assessing practice patterns (specifically the use of ACE inhibitors in CHF) identified by MEDLINE, search of bibliographies, and contact with content experts was undertaken. 37 studies have documented the use of ACE inhibitors in patients with CHF. Studies assessing use among all patients with CHF document 33% to 67% (median 51%) of all patients discharged from hospital and 10% to 36% (median 26%) of community dwelling patients were prescribed ACE inhibitors. Rates of ACE inhibitor use range from 43% to 90% (median of 71%) amongst those discharged from hospital having known systolic dysfunction, and from 67% to 95% (median of 86%) for those monitored in specialty clinics. Moreover, the dosages used in the 'real world' are substantially lower than those proven efficacious in randomised, controlled trials, with evaluations reporting only a minority of patients achieving target doses and/or an overall mean dose achieved to be less than one-half of the target dose. Factors predicting the use and optimal dose administration of ACE inhibitors are identified, and include variables relating to the setting (previous hospitalisation, specialty clinic follow-up), the physician (cardiology specialty versus family practitioner or general internist, board certification), the patient (increased severity of symptoms, male, younger), and the drug (lower frequency of administration). In light of the substantial evidence for reductions in morbidity and mortality, clearly, the prescription of ACE inhibitors is sub-optimal. Wide variability in ACE inhibitor use is noted, with higher rates consistently reported among patients having systolic dysfunction confirmed by an objective assessment--an apparent minority of the those having CHF. Optimisation of the prescription of proven efficacious therapies has the potential to confer a substantial reduction in the total cost of care for patients with CHF by reducing hospitalisations and lengths of hospital stays. It is likely that only multifaceted programs targeted toward the population at large will yield benefits to the healthcare system, given the widespread nature of the sub-optimal prescription of therapies proven effective in the management of patients with CHF.