Direct and indirect costs of management of long-term warfarin therapy in Canada

Enhancing postoperative anticoagulation therapy with remote patient monitoring: A pilot crossover trial study to evaluate portable coagulometers and chatbots in cardiac surgery follow-up

Objective

Prior research has not assessed the value of remote patient monitoring (RPM) systems for patients undergoing anticoagulation therapy after cardiac surgery. This study aims to assess whether the clinical follow-up through RPM yields comparable outcomes with the standard protocol.

Methods

A crossover trial assigned participants to SOC-RPM or RPM-SOC, starting with the standard of care (SOC) for the first 6 months after surgery and using RPM for the following 6 months, or vice-versa, respectively. During RPM, patients used the Coaguchek© to accurately measure International Normalized Ratio values and a mobile text-based chatbot to report PROs and adjust the therapeutic dosage. The study assessed patients' and clinicians' experience with RPM and compared direct costs.

Results

Twenty-seven patients participated. The median time in therapeutic range (TTR) levels during RPM were 72.2% and 50.6% for the SOC-RPM and RPM-SOC arms, respectively, and during SOC, they were 49.4% and 58.4% for SOC-RPM and RPM-SOC arms, respectively. Patients and the clinical team reported high trust and satisfaction with the proposed digital service. Statistically significant differences were only found in the cost of RPM in the RPM-SOC, which was higher than SOC in the SOC-RPM arm.

Conclusions

Portable coagulometers and chatbots can enhance the remote management of patients undergoing anticoagulation therapy, improving patient experience. This presents a promising alternative to the current standard procedure. The results of this study seem to suggest that RPM may have a higher value when initiated after a SOC period rather than starting RPM immediately after surgery.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06423521.

Patient-specific and healthcare real-world costs of atrial fibrillation in individuals treated with direct oral anticoagulant agents or warfarin

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulant therapies are used to prevent atrial fibrillation-related strokes, with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) the most common. In this study, we incorporate direct health care costs, drug costs, travel costs, and lost working and leisure time costs to estimate the total costs of the two therapies.

METHODS

This retrospective study used individual-level patient data from 4000 atrial fibrillation (AF) patients from North Karelia, Finland. Real-world data on healthcare use was obtained from the regional patient information system and data on reimbursed travel costs from the database of the Social Insurance Institution of Finland. The costs of the therapies were estimated between June 2017 and May 2018. Using a Geographical Information System (GIS), we estimated travel time and costs for each journey related to anticoagulant therapies. We ultimately applied therapy and travel costs to a cost model to reflect real-world expenditures.

RESULTS

The costs of anticoagulant therapies were calculated from the standpoint of patient and the healthcare service when considering all costs from AF-related healthcare visits, including major complications arising from atrial fibrillation. On average, the annual cost per patient for healthcare in the form of public expenditure was higher when using DOAC therapy than warfarin therapy (average cost = € 927 vs. € 805). Additionally, the average annual cost for patients was also higher with DOAC therapy (average cost = € 406.5 vs. € 296.7). In warfarin therapy, patients had considerable more travel and time costs due the different implementation practices of therapies.

CONCLUSION

The results indicated that DOAC therapy had higher costs over warfarin from the perspectives of the patient and healthcare service in the study area on average. Currently, the cost of the DOAC drug is the largest determinator of total therapy costs from both perspectives. Despite slightly higher costs, the patients on DOAC therapy experienced less AF-related complications during the study period.

Cost-effectiveness of antithrombotic agents for atrial fibrillation in older adults at risk for falls: a mathematical modelling study

BACKGROUND

Antithrombotic drugs decrease stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation, but they increase bleeding risk, particularly in older adults at high risk for falls. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective antithrombotic therapy in older adults with atrial fibrillation who are at high risk for falls.

METHODS

We conducted a mathematical modelling study from July 2019 to March 2020 based on the Ontario, Canada, health care system. We derived the base-case age, sex and fall risk distribution from a published cohort of older adults at risk for falls, and the bleeding and stroke risk parameters from an atrial fibrillation trial population. Using a probabilistic microsimulation Markov decision model, we calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for each of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), warfarin, apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and edoxaban. Cost data were adjusted for inflation to 2018 values. The analysis used the Ontario public payer perspective with a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

In our model, the most cost-effective antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation in older patients at risk for falls was apixaban, with an ICER of $8517 per QALY gained (5.86 QALYs at $92 056) over ASA. It was a dominant strategy over warfarin and the other antithrombotic agents. There was moderate uncertainty in cost-effectiveness ranking, with apixaban as the preferred choice in 66% of model iterations (given willingness to pay of $50 000 per QALY gained); edoxaban, 30 mg, was preferred in 31% of iterations. Sensitivity analysis across ranges of age, bleeding risk and fall risk still favoured apixaban over the other medications.

INTERPRETATION

From a public payer perspective, apixaban is the most cost-effective antithrombotic agent in older adults at high risk for falls. Health care funders should implement strategies to encourage use of the most cost-effective medication in this population.

Modeling patients' time, travel, and monitoring costs in anticoagulation management: societal savings achievable with the shift from warfarin to direct oral anticoagulants

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation therapy is used for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients for reducing the risk of cardioembolic complications such as stroke. The previously recommended anticoagulant, warfarin, has a narrow therapeutic window, and it requires regular laboratory monitoring, unlike direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). From a societal perspective, it is important to measure time and travel costs associated with warfarin monitoring to better compare the total therapy costs of these two alternative forms of anticoagulation management. In this study we design a georeferenced cost model to investigate societal savings achievable with the shift from warfarin to DOACs in the study region of North Karelia in Eastern Finland.

METHODS

Individual-level patient data of 6519 AF patients was obtained from the regional patient database. Patients' geocoded home addresses and other GIS data were used to perform a network analysis for the optimal routes for warfarin monitoring visits. These measures of revealed accessibility were then used in the cost model to measure monetary time and travel costs in addition to direct healthcare costs of anticoagulation management.

RESULTS

The share of time and travel costs in warfarin monitoring is 26.6% of the total therapy costs in our study region. With current drug retail prices in Finland, the societal expense of anticoagulation management is only 2.6% higher with DOACs than in the baseline with warfarin. However, when 25% lower distributor's prices are used, the total societal cost decreases by 13.6% with DOACs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that patients' time and travel costs critically increase the societal cost of warfarin therapy; and despite the higher price of DOACs, they are already cost-efficient alternatives to warfarin in anticoagulation management. In the future, the cost of AF complications should be included in the cost comparison between warfarin and DOACs. Our modeling approach applies to different geographical regions and to different healthcare processes requiring patient monitoring.

Economic Analysis of Apixaban Therapy for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation From a US Perspective: Results From the ARISTOTLE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in Atrial Fibrillation (ARISTOTLE) trial reported that apixaban therapy was superior to warfarin therapy in preventing stroke and all-cause death while causing significantly fewer major bleeds. To establish the value proposition of substituting apixiban therapy for warfarin therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation, we performed a cost-effectiveness analysis using patient-level data from the ARISTOTLE trial.

Objective

To assess the cost and cost-effectiveness of apixaban therapy compared with warfarin therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation from the perspective of the US health care system.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This economic analysis uses patient-level resource use and clinical data collected in the ARISTOTLE trial, a multinational randomized clinical trial that observed 18 201 patients (3417 US patients) for a median of 1.8 years between 2006 and 2011.

Interventions

Apixaban therapy vs warfarin therapy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Within-trial resource use and cost were compared between treatments, using externally derived US cost weights. Life expectancies for US patients were estimated according to their baseline risk and treatment using time-based and age-based survival models developed using the overall ARISTOTLE population. Quality-of-life adjustment factors were obtained from external sources. Cost-effectiveness (incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained) was evaluated from a US perspective, and extensive sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

Of the 3417 US patients enrolled in ARISTOTLE, the mean (SD) age was 71 (10) years; 2329 (68.2%) were male and 3264 (95.5%) were white. After 2 years of anticoagulation therapy, health care costs (excluding the study drug) of patients treated with apixaban therapy and warfarin therapy were not statistically different (difference, -$60; 95% CI, -$2728 to $2608). Life expectancy, modeled from ARISTOTLE outcomes, was significantly longer with apixaban therapy vs warfarin therapy (7.94 vs 7.54 quality-adjusted life years). The incremental cost, including cost of anticoagulant and monitoring, of achieving these benefits was within accepted US norms ($53 925 per quality-adjusted life year, with 98% likelihood of meeting a $100 000 willingness-to-pay threshold). Results were generally consistent when model assumptions were varied, with lifetime cost-effectiveness most affected by the price of apixaban and the time horizon.

Conclusions and Relevance

Apixaban therapy for ARISTOTLE-eligible patients with atrial fibrillation provides clinical benefits at an incremental cost that represents reasonable value for money judged using US benchmarks for cost-effectiveness.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00412984.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of case management for optimized antithrombotic treatment in German general practices compared to usual care - results from the PICANT trial

BACKGROUND

By performing case management, general practitioners and health care assistants can provide additional benefits to their chronically ill patients. However, the economic effects of such case management interventions often remain unclear although how to manage the burden of chronic disease is a key question for policy-makers. This analysis aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of 24 months of primary care case management for patients with a long-term indication for oral anticoagulation therapy with usual care.

METHODS

This analysis is part of the cluster-randomized controlled Primary Care Management for Optimized Antithrombotic Treatment (PICANT) trial. A sample of 680 patients with German statutory health insurance was initially considered for the cost analysis (92% of all participants at baseline). Costs included all disease-related direct health care costs from the payer's perspective (German statutory health insurers) plus case management costs for the intervention group. A-Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) measurement (EQ-5D-3 L instrument) was used to evaluate utility, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to assess cost-effectiveness. Mean differences were calculated and displayed with 95%-confidence intervals (CI) from non-parametric bootstrapping (1000 replicates).

RESULTS

N = 505 patients (505/680, 74%) were included in the cost analysis (complete case analysis with a follow-up after 12 and 24 months as well as information on cost and QALY). After two years, the mean difference of direct health care costs per patient (€115, 95% CI [- 201; 406]) and QALYs (0.03, 95% CI [- 0.04; 0.11]) in the two groups was small and not significant. The costs of case management in the intervention group caused mean total costs per patient in this group to rise significantly (mean difference €503, 95% CI [188; 794]). The ICER was €16,767 per QALY. Regardless of the willingness of insurers to pay per QALY, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective never rose above 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

A primary care case management for patients with a long-term indication for oral anticoagulation therapy improved QALYs compared to usual care, but was more costly. However, the results may help professionals and policy-makers allocate scarce health care resources in such a way that the overall quality of care is improved at moderate costs, particularly for chronically ill patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41847489 .

Out-of-range INR results lead to increased health-care utilization in four large anticoagulation clinics

BACKGROUND

The impact on health-care costs and utilization of a single out-of-range (OOR) INR value not associated with bleeding or thromboembolic complication among chronic warfarin-treated patients is not well described.

METHODS

At four large phone-based anticoagulation clinics (total 14 948 patients), warfarin-treated patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) or venous thromboembolism were retrospectively propensity matched into an OOR INR group (n = 116) and a control group (n = 58). Types and frequency of contacts (eg, phone, voicemail, facsimile) and personnel involved were identified. A prospective time study analysis of 59 OOR and 92 control patients was performed over 8.5 days to record the time required to care for these patients. 2016 USD cost estimates were generated from average salaries.

RESULTS

OOR and in-range INR patients experienced an average of 4.2 and 3.2 (P < .001) INR lab draws until two sequential tests were in range. OOR INR patients required an average of 5.3 interactions with the anticoagulation clinic vs 3.7 for in-range INR patients (P < .001). OOR INR patients more often required phone calls, fewer mailed letters, and more often required multiple types of contact than in-range INR patients. In the prospective analysis, total median time involved for each OOR INR value was 5.1 minutes (IQR 3.7-9.5) vs 2.9 minutes (IQR 1.8-5.8) for control INR values (P < .001). At the clinic level, OOR INR values were associated with a yearly staff cost of $17 938 (IQR $8969-$31 391).

CONCLUSIONS

We quantified the amount of extra anticoagulation staff effort required to manage warfarin-treated patients who experience a single OOR INR value without bleeding or thromboembolic complications, which leads to higher healthcare utilization costs.

Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran etexilate for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation: A Canadian payer perspective

Oral dabigatran etexilate is indicated for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in whom anticoagulation is appropriate. Based on the RE-LY study we investigated the cost-effectiveness of Health Canada approved dabigatran etexilate dosing (150 mg bid for patients <80 years, 110 mg bid for patients ≥80 years) versus warfarin and “real-world” prescribing (i.e. warfarin, aspirin, or no treatment in a cohort of warfarin-eligible patients) from a Canadian payer perspective. A Markov model simulated AF patients at moderate to high risk of stroke while tracking clinical events [primary and recurrent ischaemic strokes, systemic embolism, transient ischaemic attack, haemorrhage (intracranial, extracranial, and minor), acute myocardial infarction and death] and resulting functional disability. Acute event costs and resulting long-term follow-up costs incurred by disabled stroke survivors were based on a Canadian prospective study, published literature, and national statistics. Clinical events, summarized as events per 100 patient-years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), total costs, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. Over a lifetime, dabigatran etexilate treated patients experienced fewer intracranial haemorrhages (0.49 dabigatran etexilate vs. 1.13 warfarin vs. 1.05 “real-world” prescribing) and fewer ischaemic strokes (4.40 dabigatran etexilate vs. 4.66 warfarin vs. 5.16 “real-world” prescribing) per 100 patient-years. The ICER of dabigatran etexilate was $10,440/QALY versus warfarin and $3,962/QALY versus “real-world” prescribing. This study demonstrates that dabigatran etexilate is a highly cost-effective alternative to current care for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism among Canadian AF patients.

Incorporating edoxaban into the choice of anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation

The non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are replacing warfarin for stroke prevention in many patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Edoxaban, an oral factor Xa inhibitor, is the newest entrant in this class. Results of the Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation (ENGAGE AF) study demonstrate that edoxaban is noninferior to warfarin for prevention of stroke and systemic embolic events, and is associated with significantly less major bleeding, including intracranial bleeding, and reduced cardiovascular mortality. With a net clinical benefit over warfarin, edoxaban is well positioned as a choice among the NOACs, which include dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban. But how will clinicians choose amongst them? The purpose of this paper is to (a) place the ENGAGE AF trial results into context with results of the studies with the other NOACs, and (b) aid clinicians in selection of the right anticoagulant for the right atrial fibrillation patient.

The cost of warfarin treatment for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Russia from a collective perspective

AIMS

Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are used for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), but necessitate regular monitoring of prothrombin time via international normalized ratio (INR) testing. This study explores the economic burden of VKA therapy for Russian patients with NVAF.

METHOD

Cardiologists provided clinical characteristics and healthcare resource use data relating to the patient's first year of treatment. Data were used to quantify direct medical costs (INR testing, consultations, drug costs). The same patients completed a questionnaire providing data on direct non-medical costs (travel/expenses for attendance at VKA appointments) and indirect costs (opportunity cost and reduced work productivity). Mean costs per patient per year are described (US dollars).

RESULTS

Cardiologists (n = 50) provided data on 400 patients (mean age = 63, 47% female), and 351 patients (88%) completed the patient questionnaire. Patients had a mean of nine INR tests. Estimated direct medical costs totaled $151.06, and 18.5% of direct medical costs were attributable to drug costs. Estimated annual direct non-medical costs were $22.89 per patient, and indirect costs were $275.59 per patient.

LIMITATIONS

Included patients had been treated for 12-24 months, so are not fully representative of the broader treatment population.

CONCLUSION

Although VKA drugs costs are relatively low, regular INR testing and consultations drive the economic burden for Russian NVAF patients treated with VKA.

The cost of warfarin treatment for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Mexico from a collective perspective

AIMS

To describe the collective costs of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) treatment for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). VKA drug costs are relatively low, but they necessitate frequent international normalized ratio (INR) monitoring. There are currently minimal data describing the economic impact of this in Mexico.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cardiologists provided data on their NVAF patients (n = 400) to quantify direct medical costs (INR testing, appointments, drug costs). A sub-set of patients (n = 301) completed a patient questionnaire providing data to calculate direct non-medical costs (travel and other expenses for attendance at VKA-associated appointments) and indirect costs (opportunity cost and reduced work productivity associated with VKA treatment).

RESULTS

Estimated annual direct medical costs totaled $753.6 per patient. Annual direct non-medical and indirect costs were USD$149.8 and $132.1, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Recruited patients were those who consulted with a cardiologist during the study period and selected due to inclusion criteria. All had received uninterrupted treatment for 12-24 months. Consequently, the results are not fully generalizable to all VKA treated NVAF patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The true cost of VKA treatment cannot be appreciated by a consideration of drug costs alone. Ongoing monitoring appointments incur additional expenses for both patients and the healthcare system.

Healthcare costs associated with rivaroxaban or warfarin use for the treatment of venous thromboembolism

INTRODUCTION

Rivaroxaban has been shown to have similar efficacy but less major bleeding than warfarin in randomized trials of patients experiencing venous thromboembolism (VTE). This report sought to assess healthcare costs up to 12-months following an index VTE in patients prescribed either rivaroxaban or warfarin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study analyzed claims from the MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database from November 2011-July 2015. It selected adults newly-diagnosed with VTE (deep vein thrombosis [DVT] or pulmonary embolism [PE]) if they had an outpatient prescription claim for rivaroxaban or warfarin within 7-days of the index event. Warfarin users were 2:1 propensity-score matched to rivaroxaban users and followed until the end of insurance coverage, end of data availability or 12-months of follow-up. Total per patient healthcare costs, including inpatient, outpatient, and overall pharmacy costs, were compared using a multivariable generalized linear model.

RESULTS

In total, 10,929 rivaroxaban patients were matched to 21,858 warfarin patients. Mean follow-up for rivaroxaban and warfarin patients was 317- and 321-days for those experiencing an index DVT, and 313- and 318-days for those with PE. Mean overall treatment costs per patient were lower for rivaroxaban vs warfarin users (-$1,116, p = .0016). This cost difference was driven by lower inpatient (-$622) and outpatient (-$1,156) treatment costs, and the higher pharmacy costs ($661) were, therefore, fully offset. Results were similar when analysis was restricted to DVT patients. No significant difference in total costs was observed in patients experiencing an index PE.

LIMITATIONS

Claims databases are subject to inaccuracies and missing data. Prescription claims may not fully reflect actual medication utilization. Despite propensity-score matching and regression, residual confounding cannot be excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

Rivaroxaban was associated with significantly lower total per patient VTE treatment costs, despite higher pharmacy costs. These savings are the result of decreased inpatient and outpatient healthcare utilization costs associated with rivaroxaban.

Edoxaban: A Review in Deep Vein Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism

Edoxaban (Lixiana, Savaysa) is an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor which has recently been approved for use in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) [collectively, venous thromboembolism (VTE)] and for the prevention of recurrent VTE. This article reviews the pharmacological properties of edoxaban as well as its tolerability and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment and prevention of recurrent VTE events. As demonstrated in the pivotal Hokusai-VTE phase III trial, once-daily edoxaban after initial treatment with heparin was non-inferior to standard therapy with heparin/warfarin in preventing recurrent VTE events and was associated with a significantly lower risk of clinically relevant bleeding than the traditional therapy. Edoxaban shares the advantages of other direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over traditional therapies, including the lack of requirement for routine coagulation monitoring, a rapid onset and offset of action, and few drug-drug interactions. It offers the convenience of once-daily dosing, can be taken without regard to food and allows for a dose reduction in patients with certain clinical features, such as moderate renal impairment or low body weight. In conclusion, edoxaban represents an effective and potentially safer alternative to traditional vitamin K antagonist therapy for the treatment and prevention of recurrent VTE. Its recent approval expands the range of DOAC agents for recurrent VTE, further facilitating treatment individualization.

Using Phase-Based Costing of Real-World Data to Inform Decision-Analytic Models for Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (AF) poses a significant economic burden. An increasing number of interventions for AF require cost-effectiveness analysis with decision-analytic modeling to demonstrate value. However, high-quality cost estimates of AF that can be used to inform decision-analytic models are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine whether phase-based costing methods are feasible and practical for informing decision-analytic models outside of oncology.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with AF between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2011 in Ontario, Canada were identified based on a hospital admission for AF using administrative data housed at the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. Patient observations were then divided into phases based on clinical events typically used for decision-analytic modeling (i.e., minor stroke/transient ischemic attack [TIA], moderate to severe ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, extracranial hemorrhage [ECH], intracranial hemorrhage [ICH], multiple events, death from an event, or death from other causes). First 30-day and greater than 30-day costs of healthcare resources in each health state were estimated based on a validated methodology. All costs are reported in 2013 Canadian dollars (Can$) and from a healthcare payer perspective.

RESULTS

Patients (n = 109,002) with AF who did not experience a clinical event incurred costs of Can$1566 per 30 days, on average. The average 30-day cost of experiencing a fatal clinical event was Can$42,871, but the cost of dying from all other causes was much smaller (Can$12,800). The clinical events associated with the highest short-term costs were ICH (Can$22,347) and moderate to severe ischemic stroke (Can$19,937). The lowest short-term costs were due to minor ischemic stroke/TIA (Can$12,515) and ECH (Can$12,261). Patients who had experienced a moderate to severe ischemic stroke incurred the highest long-term costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world Canadian data and a phase-based costing approach were used to estimate short- and long-term costs associated with AF-related major clinical events. The results of this study can also inform decision-analytic models for AF.

Comparing Length of Stay Between Patients Taking Rivaroxaban and Conventional Anticoagulants for Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated non-inferiority of rivaroxaban when compared to warfarin for the treatment of pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis. Analysis of data from the EINSTEIN trials has demonstrated that patients who received rivaroxaban had a shorter length of stay (LOS) compared to those who received warfarin. However, these trials had strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, and were designed for a different primary outcome. Also, data from these closely monitored clinical trials may not reflect the daily practice of medicine.

OBJECTIVES

To clarify this issue further, we performed a retrospective analysis at our institution, comparing the LOS between patients discharged on rivaroxaban and other conventional anticoagulants (warfarin, enoxaparin, and enoxaparin with warfarin).

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of consecutive patients admitted to our institution from January 2011 to July 2014 with newly diagnosed venous thromboembolism (VTE). Inclusion criteria were age > 18 years and objective confirmation of VTE. Exclusion criteria included diagnosis of VTE 24 h after admission, contraindication to anticoagulation, treatment with fibrinolytic agents, patients already on anticoagulation, and pregnancy. Out of 1553 consecutive patients diagnosed with VTE, a total of 414 patients met the eligibility criteria. These patients were further subdivided into four groups based on their discharge anticoagulant: rivaroxaban, warfarin, enoxaparin, and warfarin with enoxaparin.

RESULTS

Patients discharged on rivaroxaban had a significantly shorter LOS compared with patients discharged on warfarin (3.5 vs. 7.0 days; p < 0.001), but not when compared to those discharged on enoxaparin alone (3.0 days) or enoxaparin with warfarin (4.0 days) (p > 0.05). The hospital incidence of bleeding and the 6-month readmission rates were not different among the different anticoagulants.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients admitted with newly diagnosed VTE, those discharged on rivaroxaban had a significantly shorter LOS compared to those discharged on warfarin. In the appropriate subset of patients with VTE, treatment with rivaroxaban may result in significant cost savings for the hospital.

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants and atrial fibrillation guidelines in practice: barriers to and strategies for optimal implementation

Stroke is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an independent risk factor for stroke, increasing the risk five-fold. Strokes in patients with AF are more likely than other embolic strokes to be fatal or cause severe disability and are associated with higher healthcare costs, but they are also preventable. Current guidelines recommend that all patients with AF who are at risk of stroke should receive anticoagulation. However, despite this guidance, registry data indicate that anticoagulation is still widely underused. With a focus on the 2012 update of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for the management of AF, the Action for Stroke Prevention alliance writing group have identified key reasons for the suboptimal implementation of the guidelines at a global, regional, and local level, with an emphasis on access restrictions to guideline-recommended therapies. Following identification of these barriers, the group has developed an expert consensus on strategies to augment the implementation of current guidelines, including practical, educational, and access-related measures. The potential impact of healthcare quality measures for stroke prevention on guideline implementation is also explored. By providing practical guidance on how to improve implementation of the ESC guidelines, or region-specific modifications of these guidelines, the aim is to reduce the potentially devastating impact that stroke can have on patients, their families and their carers.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment of venous thromboembolism with rivaroxaban compared with combined low molecular weight heparin/vitamin K antagonist

Background

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a burden on healthcare systems. Standard treatment involves parenteral anticoagulation overlapping with a vitamin K antagonist, an approach that is effective but associated with limitations including the need for frequent coagulation monitoring. The direct oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban is similarly effective to standard therapy as a single-drug treatment for VTE and does not require routine coagulation monitoring. The objective of this economic evaluation was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared with standard VTE treatment from a UK perspective.

Methods

A Markov model was constructed using data and probabilities derived from the EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE studies of rivaroxaban and other published sources. Health outcomes included VTE rates, bleeding events avoided, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

There was greater discounted quality-adjusted life expectancy with rivaroxaban than with standard therapy, irrespective of indication and treatment duration. Rivaroxaban was associated with per-patient cost savings for each treatment duration modelled (3, 6 and 12 months), and these were greatest with shorter durations. Rivaroxaban was found to be dominant (cheaper and more effective) and, therefore, cost-effective, in both patients with deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in all three treatment duration groups, and was also cost-effective in patients requiring lifelong anticoagulation (ICERs: £8677 per QALY and £7072 per QALY in patients with index deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, respectively). The cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban was largely insensitive to variations in one-way sensitivity analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY, rivaroxaban had a consistent probability of being cost-effective, compared with LMWH/VKA treatment, of around 80% regardless of index VTE or duration of anticoagulation therapy (3, 6, 12 months or lifelong).

Conclusions

This analysis suggests that rivaroxaban represents a cost-effective choice for acute treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism and secondary prevention of VTE in the UK, compared with LMWH/VKA treatment, regardless of the required treatment duration.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12959-015-0051-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Warfarin treatment among Finnish patients with atrial fibrillation: retrospective registry study based on primary healthcare data

OBJECTIVE

To assess the frequency of warfarin use, the achieved international normalised ratio (INR) balance among warfarin users and the primary healthcare outpatient costs of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

DESIGN

Retrospective, non-interventional registry study.

SETTING

Primary healthcare.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients with AF (n=2746) treated in one Finnish health centre between October 2010 and March 2012.

METHODS

Data on healthcare resource use, warfarin use, individually defined target INR range and INR test results were collected from the primary healthcare database for patients with AF diagnosis. The analysed dataset consisted of a 1-year follow-up. Warfarin treatment balance was estimated with the proportion of time spent in the therapeutic INR range (TTR). The cost of used healthcare resources was valued separately with national and service provider unit costs to estimate the total outpatient treatment costs. The factors potentially impacting the treatment costs were assessed with a generalised linear regression model.

RESULTS

Approximately 50% of the patients with AF with CHADS-VASc ≥1 used warfarin. The average TTR was 65.2% but increased to 74.5% among patients using warfarin continuously (ie, without gaps exceeding 56 days between successive INR tests) during follow-up. One-third of the patients had a TTR of below 60%. The average outpatient costs in the patient cohort were €314.44 with the national unit costs and €560.26 with the service provider unit costs. The costs among warfarin users were, on average, €524.11 or €939.54 higher compared with the costs among non-users, depending on the used unit costs. A higher TTR was associated with lower outpatient costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients in the study centre using warfarin were, on average, well controlled on warfarin, yet one-third of patients had a TTR of below 60%.

The economic costs of routine INR monitoring in infants and children--examining point-of-care devices used within the home setting compared to traditional anticoagulation clinic monitoring

INTRODUCTION

The use of point-of-care (POC) devices within the home for routine INR monitoring has demonstrated reliability, safety and effectiveness in the management of infants and children requiring long-term warfarin therapy. However, a comprehensive cost-analysis of using this method of management, compared to attending anticoagulation clinics has not been reported. The aim of this study was to compare the estimated societal costs of attending anticoagulation clinics for routine INR monitoring to using a POC test in the home.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used a comparative before-and-after design that included 60 infants and children managed via the Haematology department at a tertiary paediatric centre. Each participant was exposed to both modes of management at various times for a period of ≥3 months. A questionnaire, consisting of 25 questions was sent to families to complete and return. Data collected included: the frequency of monitoring, mode of travel to and from clinics, total time consumed, and primary carer's income level.

RESULTS

The home monitoring cohort saved a total of 1 hour 19 minutes per INR test compared to attending anticoagulation clinics and had a cost saving to society of $66.83 (AUD) per INR test compared to traditional care; incorporating health sector costs, travel expenses and lost time.

CONCLUSIONS

The traditional model of care requires a considerable investment of time per test from both child and carer. Home INR monitoring in infants and children provides greater societal economic benefits compared to traditional models.

Rivaroxaban: practical considerations for ensuring safety and efficacy

Rivaroxaban is the first agent available within a new class of anticoagulants called direct factor Xa inhibitors. Rivaroxaban is approved for use in the United States for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, for the prevention of deep vein thrombosis in patients undergoing total hip replacement and total knee replacement, for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, and for the reduction in risk of recurrence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (with additional indications under review). Rivaroxaban dose and frequency of administration vary depending on the indication. As of result of predictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, a fixed dose of rivaroxaban is administered without routine coagulation testing. Rivaroxaban has a short half-life, undergoes a dual mode of elimination (hepatic and renal), and is a substrate for P-glycoprotein. Rivaroxaban has a lower potential for drug interactions compared with warfarin. Despite the advantages of a once/day fixed-dose oral agent, in many clinical situations limited evidence is available to guide optimal management of rivaroxaban therapy. In this article, we review the available evidence and provide recommendations where possible for such situations including the desire to monitor the anticoagulation intensity, use in special patient populations, managing drug interactions, and transitioning across anticoagulant agents. Potential strategies for reversing rivaroxaban's anticoagulant effect are reviewed. Health systems will need to perform a systematic safety evaluation and ensure that numerous hospital policies related to anticoagulation are updated to include rivaroxaban. A comprehensive approach to education is needed for clinicians, patients, and technical support personnel involved in patient interactions to ensure safe use.

Economic evaluation of percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion, dabigatran, and warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion and novel pharmacological therapies are now available to manage stroke risk in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation; however, the cost-effectiveness of LAA occlusion compared with dabigatran and warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation is unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cost-utility analysis using a patient-level Markov microsimulation decision analytic model with a lifetime horizon was undertaken to determine the lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of LAA occlusion in relation to dabigatran and warfarin in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk for stroke without contraindications to oral anticoagulation. The analysis was performed from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care, the third-party payer for insured health services in Ontario, Canada. Effectiveness and utility data were obtained from the published literature. Cost data were obtained from the Ontario Drug Benefits Formulary and the Ontario Case Costing Initiative. Warfarin therapy had the lowest discounted quality-adjusted life years at 4.55, followed by dabigatran at 4.64 and LAA occlusion at 4.68. The average discounted lifetime cost was $21 429 for a patient taking warfarin, $25 760 for a patient taking dabigatran, and $27 003 for LAA occlusion. Compared with warfarin, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for LAA occlusion was $41 565. Dabigatran was extendedly dominated.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous LAA occlusion represents a novel therapy for stroke reduction that is cost-effective compared with warfarin for patients at risk who have nonvalvular atrial fibrillation.

A clinical decision aid for the selection of antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of stroke due to atrial fibrillation

AIMS

The availability of new antithrombotic agents, each with a unique efficacy and bleeding profile, has introduced a considerable amount of clinical uncertainty with physicians. We have developed a clinical decision aid in order to assist clinicians in determining an optimal antithrombotic regime for the prevention of stroke in patients who are newly diagnosed with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc and HAS-BLED scoring systems were used to assess patients' baseline risks of stroke and major bleeding, respectively. The relative risks of stroke and major bleeding for each antithrombotic agent were then used to identify the agent associated with the lowest net risk. Individual patient factors such as the treatment threshold, bleeding ratio, and cost threshold modified the recommendations in order to generate a final recommendation. By considering both patient factors and clinical research concurrently, this clinical decision aid is able to provide specific advice to clinicians regarding an optimal stroke prevention strategy. The resulting treatment recommendation tables are consistent with the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology and Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines, which can be incorporated into either a paper-based or electronic format to allow clinicians to have decision support at the point of care.

CONCLUSION

The use of a clinical decision aid that considers both patient factors and evidence-based medicine will serve to bridge the knowledge gap and provide practical guidance to clinicians in the prevention of stroke due to atrial fibrillation.

Novel oral anticoagulants and their role in clinical practice

The complexities of oral anticoagulation with warfarin have led to the search for more practical alternative agents. Novel direct factor IIa inhibitors and direct factor Xa inhibitors currently in development can be administered at a fixed dose and do not require routine coagulation monitoring and ongoing dosage adjustment to ensure their effectiveness and safety. A number of phase III trials of these agents for the prevention of venous thromboembolism associated with orthopedic surgery and acute medical illness, for the treatment of venous thromboembolism, and for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation have been completed, with almost universally positive results. If these novel agents are approved for use in the United States, the future of oral anticoagulant therapy will allow a more nuanced approach to drug selection than has been available in the past. Attention to drug interactions and renal function will be required, as methods to measure the presence of these agents are not precise, cannot quantify the degree of anticoagulant present, and are influenced by the changes in serum drug concentrations during the dosing interval. In the future, patient preferences and the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of individual drugs will be able to be matched to optimize therapy. These new agents represent a new paradigm for anticoagulation that promises to improve patient care in the long term.

A review of the cost of atrial fibrillation

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review and synthesize the literature on the costs of atrial fibrillation (AF) with attention to study design and costing methods, geography, and intervention approaches.

METHODS

A systematic search for previously published studies reporting the costs for AF patients was conducted. Data were analyzed in three steps: first by evaluating overall system costs; second by evaluating the relative contribution of specific cost components; and third by examining variations across study designs, across primary treatment approach, and by geography. Finally, a specific review of the treatment costs associated with anticoagulation treatment was examined given the clinical importance and attention given to these costs in the literature.

RESULTS

The literature search resulted in 115 articles. On review of the abstracts or full text of these articles, 21 articles met all study criteria and reported on health system AF-related direct costs. A further six articles focused exclusively on anticoagulation costs for patients with AF. The overall average annual system cost across 27 estimates obtained from the literature was $5450 (SD = $3624) in 2010 Canadian dollars and ranged from a low of $1,632 to a high of $21,099. About one-third of these costs could be attributed to anticoagulation management. The largest cost component was acute care, followed by outpatient and physician and then medication-related costs.

CONCLUSION

AF-related medical costs are high, reflecting resource-intensive and long-term treatments including anticoagulation treatment. These costs, accompanied with increasing prevalence, justify increased attention to the management of patients with AF. Future studies of AF cost should ensure a broad assessment of the incremental direct medical and societal cost associated with this diagnosis.