The cost-utility of dabigatran etexilate compared with warfarin in treatment and extended anticoagulation of acute VTE in the UK

Avatrombopag and lusutrombopag for thrombocytopenia in people with chronic liver disease needing an elective procedure: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

There have been no licensed treatment options in the UK for treating thrombocytopenia in people with chronic liver disease requiring surgery. Established management largely involves platelet transfusion prior to the procedure or as rescue therapy for bleeding due to the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two thrombopoietin receptor agonists, avatrombopag (Doptelet^®; Dova Pharmaceuticals, Durham, NC, USA) and lusutrombopag (Mulpleta^®; Shionogi Inc., London, UK), in addition to established clinical management compared with established clinical management (no thrombopoietin receptor agonist) in the licensed populations.

DESIGN

Systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

SETTING

Secondary care.

PARTICIPANTS

Severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count of < 50,000/µl) in people with chronic liver disease requiring surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Lusutrombopag 3 mg and avatrombopag (60 mg if the baseline platelet count is < 40,000/µl and 40 mg if it is 40,000-< 50,000/µl).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Risk of platelet transfusion and rescue therapy or risk of rescue therapy only.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic review including meta-analysis. English-language and non-English-language articles were obtained from several databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, all searched from inception to 29 May 2019.

ECONOMIC EVALUATION

Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

From a comprehensive search retrieving 11,305 records, six studies were included. Analysis showed that avatrombopag and lusutrombopag were superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in avoiding both platelet transfusion and rescue therapy or rescue therapy only, and mostly with a statistically significant difference (i.e. 95% confidence intervals not overlapping the point of no difference). However, only avatrombopag seemed to be superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in reducing the risk of rescue therapy, although far fewer patients in the lusutrombopag trials than in the avatrombopag trials received rescue therapy. When assessing the cost-effectiveness of lusutrombopag and avatrombopag, it was found that, despite the success of these in avoiding platelet transfusions prior to surgery, the additional long-term gain in quality-adjusted life-years was very small. No thrombopoietin receptor agonist was clearly cheaper than both lusutrombopag and avatrombopag, as the cost savings from avoiding platelet transfusions were more than offset by the drug cost. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that, for all thresholds below £100,000, no thrombopoietin receptor agonist had 100% probability of being cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

Some of the rescue therapy data for lusutrombopag were not available. There were inconsistencies in the avatrombopag data. From the cost-effectiveness point of view, there were several additional important gaps in the evidence required, including the lack of a price for avatrombopag.

CONCLUSIONS

Avatrombopag and lusutrombopag were superior to no thrombopoietin receptor agonist in avoiding both platelet transfusion and rescue therapy, but they were not cost-effective given the lack of benefit and increase in cost.

FUTURE WORK

A head-to-head trial is warranted.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42019125311.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of lusutrombopag for thrombocytopenia in patients with chronic liver disease in Japan

Background and Aim

Thrombocytopenia is a frequent hematological condition in chronic liver disease (CLD) patients increasing the risk of bleeding in patients undergoing invasive procedures. Without an alternative, clinical guidelines recommended the use of platelet transfusion (PT) prior to procedure to prevent this bleeding risk. Lusutrombopag (LUSU), an orally active, small‐molecule thrombopoietin receptor agonist, was developed as an alternative to PT. The objective of this study was to evaluate a cost‐effectiveness of LUSU as a potential alternative to PT in Japan.

Methods

A cost‐effectiveness analysis of LUSU relative to PT was conducted by a simulation model consisting of a decision tree combined to Markov model. Quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) were used as an indicator of efficacy, and the analysis was conducted from the Japanese public healthcare payer's perspective. The time horizon of the analysis was 50 years (a lifetime) and the discount rate was set at 2%.

Results

LUSU gained 6.1803 QALYs with an expected lifetime costs of 2 380 219 JPY compared to PT with 6.1712 QALYs gained and expected lifetime costs of 2 382 908 JPY. Thus, LUSU was deemed dominant compared with PT. Based on probabilistic analyses, the chance of LUSU being dominant and the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio being below 5 million JPY/QALY was estimated at 51.8% and 78.3%, respectively, demonstrating the robustness of the results.

Conclusions

LUSU was evaluated as an efficacious and cost‐saving treatment option for Japanese CLD patients with thrombocytopenia who required a planned invasive procedure compared with PT and economically should be considered as an alternative treatment.

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), occurs in ∼1 to 2 individuals per 1000 each year, corresponding to ∼300 000 to 600 000 events in the United States annually.

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines from the American Society of Hematology (ASH) intend to support patients, clinicians, and others in decisions about treatment of VTE.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and adult patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 28 recommendations for the initial management of VTE, primary treatment, secondary prevention, and treatment of recurrent VTE events.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations include the use of thrombolytic therapy for patients with PE and hemodynamic compromise, use of an international normalized ratio (INR) range of 2.0 to 3.0 over a lower INR range for patients with VTE who use a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) for secondary prevention, and use of indefinite anticoagulation for patients with recurrent unprovoked VTE. Conditional recommendations include the preference for home treatment over hospital-based treatment for uncomplicated DVT and PE at low risk for complications and a preference for direct oral anticoagulants over VKA for primary treatment of VTE.

Extended anticoagulation for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolic events: An updated network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Extended treatment is preconized in a significant proportion of patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, limited direct/indirect comparisons are available to appropriately weight the benefit/risk ratio of the diverse treatments available. We aimed to compare the rate of symptomatic recurrent VTE and major bleeding (MB), the net clinical benefit (VTE+MB) and death on vitamin-K antagonist (VKA), direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and antiplatelet drugs for extended anticoagulation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search through September 2018 identified randomized trials studying these pharmacologic therapies for extended anticoagulation following VTE. Treatment effects were calculated using network meta-analysis with frequentist fixed-effects model.

RESULTS

18 trials (18,221 patients) were included in the analysis. All treatments reduced the risk of recurrence compared to placebo/observation. Nonetheless, VKA (RR 0.22; 95%CI 0.13-0.39) and DOAC (RRs ranging from 0.25-0.32; 95%CI ranging from 0.13-0.52) were more effective than aspirin, whereas low-dose VKA was less effective than standard-dose VKA (RR 2.47; 95%CI 1.34-4.55). The efficacy of DOAC was globally comparable to standard-adjusted dose VKA. Low- (RR 3.13; 95%CI 1.37-7.16) and standard-dose (RR 3.23; 95%CI 1.16-8.99) VKA also increased the risk of MB, which was not the case for any DOAC. Low-dose VKA and low-dose DOAC had similar effects on MB compared to standard-doses. Although there was a trend for reduced MB and enhanced net clinical benefit for DOAC compared to VKA, this was not statistically significant. The specific anticoagulant therapies had no significant effects on deaths.

CONCLUSION

Standard-dose VKA and low/standard-dose DOAC share similar effects on VTE recurrence and MB, whereas aspirin and low-dose VKA were associated with lower benefit/risk ratio.

Cost-effectiveness of the pharmacist-assisted warfarin monitoring program at a Medical Center in Taiwan

Objective

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of the first patient self-paying pharmacist-assisted warfarin monitoring (PAWM) program in Taiwan.

Design

A Markov model with a 1-month cycle length and a 20-year time horizon was employed in this study. The model is composed of the following eight states: three no-event states (i.e. 'subtherapeutic,' 'within therapeutic' and 'supratherapeutic' states), two serious adverse events (AEs) (i.e. bleeding and thromboembolism), two sequelae states and death. The likelihood of events, costs and utilities were derived from local databases and literature, if applicable. This study was conducted with a payer's perspective and all costs were discounted with a rate of 3%.

Setting

A pharmacist-led clinic.

Participants

A hypothetical cohort of 10 000 participants.

Intervention(s)

PAWM versus usual care.

Main outcome measure(s)

Average quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and cost increments per patient, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Results

The PAWM program resulted in an average of 0.13 QALYs gained and a cost increment of NT$53 850 (US$1683) per patient. As the ICER (NT$410 749 [US$12 836]) was less than the gross domestic product per capita (NT$631 142 [US$19 723]), the PAWM was considered to be very cost-effective. The sensitivity analyses suggested that our result was robust and that the PAWM program had an 86% probability of being very cost-effective.

Conclusions

Even if the costs saved from avoiding AEs were thought to be minimal due to the low-medical expenditures in Taiwan, the PAWM program was demonstrated to be economical. According to our findings, the policymakers should consider reimbursing such a service.

A decision model to estimate a risk threshold for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients

Essentials Low risk patients don't require venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis; low risk is unquantified. We used a Markov model to estimate the risk threshold for VTE prophylaxis in medical inpatients. Prophylaxis was cost-effective for an average medical patient with a VTE risk of ≥ 1.0%. VTE prophylaxis can be personalized based on patient risk and age/life expectancy.

SUMMARY

Background Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common preventable condition in medical inpatients. Thromboprophylaxis is recommended for inpatients who are not at low risk of VTE, but no specific risk threshold for prophylaxis has been defined. Objective To determine a threshold for prophylaxis based on risk of VTE. Patients/Methods We constructed a decision model with a decision-tree following patients for 3 months after hospitalization, and a lifetime Markov model with 3-month cycles. The model tracked symptomatic deep vein thromboses and pulmonary emboli, bleeding events and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. Long-term complications included recurrent VTE, post-thrombotic syndrome and pulmonary hypertension. For the base case, we considered medical inpatients aged 66 years, having a life expectancy of 13.5 years, VTE risk of 1.4% and bleeding risk of 2.7%. Patients received enoxaparin 40 mg day-1 for prophylaxis. Results Assuming a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $100 000/ quality-adjusted life year (QALY), prophylaxis was indicated for an average medical inpatient with a VTE risk of ≥ 1.0% up to 3 months after hospitalization. For the average patient, prophylaxis was not indicated when the bleeding risk was > 8.1%, the patient's age was > 73.4 years or the cost of enoxaparin exceeded $60/dose. If VTE risk was < 0.26% or bleeding risk was > 19%, the risks of prophylaxis outweighed benefits. The prophylaxis threshold was relatively insensitive to low-molecular-weight heparin cost and bleeding risk, but very sensitive to patient age and life expectancy. Conclusions The decision to offer prophylaxis should be personalized based on patient VTE risk, age and life expectancy. At a WTP of $100 000/QALY, prophylaxis is not warranted for most patients with a 3-month VTE risk below 1.0%.

Dabigatran for the Treatment and Secondary Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism; A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for the Netherlands

Background

Dabigatran was proven to have similar effect on the prevention of recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and a lower risk of bleeding compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKA). The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of dabigatran for the treatment and secondary prevention in patients with VTE compared to VKAs in the Dutch setting.

Methods

Previously published Markov model was modified and updated to assess the CE of dabigatran and VKAs for the treatment and secondary prevention in patients with VTE from a societal perspective in the base-case analysis. The model was populated with efficacy and safety data from major dabigatran trials (i.e. RE-COVER, RECOVER II, RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE), Dutch specific costs, and utilities derived from dabigatran trials or other published literature. Univariate, probabilistic sensitivity and a number of scenario analyses evaluating various decision-analytic settings (e.g. the perspective of analysis, use of anticoagulants only for treatment or only for secondary prevention, or comparison to no treatment) were tested on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).

Results

In the base-case scenario, patients on dabigatran gained an additional 0.034 quality adjusted life year (QALY) while saving €1,598. Results of univariate sensitivity analysis were quite robust. The probability that dabigatran is cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000/QALY was 98.1%. From the perspective of healthcare provider, extended anticoagulation with dabigatran compared to VKAs was estimated at €2,158 per QALY gained. The ICER for anticoagulation versus no treatment in patients with equipoise risk of recurrent VTE was estimated at €33,379 per QALY gained. Other scenarios showed dabigatran was cost-saving.

Conclusion

From a societal perspective, dabigatran is likely to be a cost-effective or even cost-saving strategy for treatment and secondary prevention of VTE compared to VKAs in the Netherlands.

DOACs - advances and limitations in real world

The group of new oral anticoagulants or NOACs, now termed direct oral anticoagulants or DOACs, with their favourable results from large scale phase III clinical trials, represent a major advancement and expanded armamentarium in antithrombotic therapy. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban are now in clinical routine use for prevention and treatment of arterial and venous thrombotic diseases as addressed in their clinical trials. Usage of the DOACs is expected to increase as clinicians gain more experience and reassurance with data from the real world studies which are generally consistent with that from clinical trials. Development of specific antidotes in management of bleeding complications and development of coagulation assays for their plasma levels will further boost the confidence in the DOACs. Nonetheless, there are still limitations associated with the DOACs. Many patients in need of anticoagulant therapy for indications not studied in the clinical trials will not be eligible for treatment with a DOAC. Conditions where more data is required include DOACs use in the paediatric age group, patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease, thrombosis associated with the anti-phospholipid syndrome and cancer associated thrombosis. The affordability and access to these drugs may pose an issue for many patients under healthcare systems not providing for these medications. With four new anticoagulants coming onboard very quickly, the focus has shifted to the practical approach and management in real life as many clinicians are not yet familiar with the DOACs. Clinicians need to be educated on how to manage this new class for drugs, from choosing the appropriate drug to prevention and managing bleeding complications as a lack of knowledge and understanding in these drugs will lead to inappropriate use and compromise on patient safety.

Indirect comparison and cost-utility of dabigatran etexilate and rivaroxaban in the treatment and extended anticoagulation of venous thromboembolism in a UK setting

BACKGROUND

Acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is traditionally managed with a short course of parenteral anticoagulation followed by 3-6 months of a vitamin-K antagonist. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) do not require routine monitoring and dose adjustment, thus potentially provide an alternative treatment option.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Because of the lack of head-to-head clinical studies, an indirect comparison was conducted of dabigatran etexilate and rivaroxaban based on the respective phase III clinical trial. The derived relative safety and efficacy estimates were used to evaluate the cost-utility of dabigatran compared with rivaroxaban in the treatment and secondary prevention of VTE. The results of the indirect comparison showed no significant difference between dabigatran and rivaroxaban in avoiding recurrent VTE following index PE, index DVT, or DVT/PE combined, in treatment and extended anticoagulation. Dabigatran has significantly less major or clinically relevant bleeds (MCRBE) compared to rivaroxaban in treatment after index DVT and treatment after DVT or PE combined, but was not significantly different from rivaroxaban after index PE or in extended anticoagulation. In cost-utility deterministic analyses, dabigatran was projected dominant in all analyzed settings, given its marginally lower total cost and marginally higher QALYs gained compared to rivaroxaban. Probabilistic analyses results showed a high likelihood of dabigatran being considered good value for money in the UK, in treatment and in secondary prevention of VTE.

CONCLUSION

The cost-effectiveness evaluations showed that dabigatran can be considered the dominant treatment strategy compared to rivaroxaban in the patients' sub-groups considered, given the projected marginally higher clinical benefits and lower treatment costs.