Cost-effectiveness analysis of Shexiang Baoxin Pill (MUSKARDIA) as the add-on treatment to standard therapy for stable coronary artery disease in China

BACKGROUND

Recent evidence indicates that Shexiang Baoxin Pill (MUSKARDIA), as an add-on treatment to standard therapy for stable coronary artery disease (CAD), is effective. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of introducing the Shexiang Baoxin Pill (Abbreviation SBP) to the current standard treatment for patients with CAD in China remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of introducing SBP into the current standard treatment in China for patients with CAD.

METHOD

The effects of two treatment strategies-the SBP group (SBP combined with standard therapy) and the standard therapy group (placebo combined with standard therapy)-were simulated using a long-term Markov model. The simulation subjects might experience non-fatal MI and/or stroke or vascular or non-vascular death events. The study parameters were primarily derived from the MUSKARDIA trial, which was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IV randomized clinical trial. Furthermore, age-related change, event costs, and event utilities were drawn from publicly available sources. Both costs and health outcomes were discounted at 5.0% per annum. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to verify the robustness of the model. Based on the MUSKARDIA trial results, the risk with the events of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was decreased (P < 0.05) in the female subgroup treated with SBP therapy compared with standard therapy. Consequently, a scenario analysis based on subgroups of Chinese females was conducted for this study. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were assessed for each strategy for costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved.

RESULTS

After 30 years of simulation, the SBP group has added 0.32 QALYs, and the cost has been saved 841.00 CNY. Compared with the standard therapy, the ICER for the SBP therapy was -2628.13 CNY per QALY. Scenario analyses of Chinese females showed that, after 30 years of simulation, the SBP therapy has been increased by 0.82 QALYs, and the cost has been reduced by 19474.00 CNY. Compared with the standard therapy, the ICER for the SBP therapy was -26569.51 CNY per QALY. Similar results were obtained in various extensive sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of SBP in the treatment of CAD. In conclusion, SBP as an add-on treatment to standard therapy appears to be a cost-effective strategy for CAD in Chinese patients.

Associations of pro-protein convertase subtilisin-like kexin type 9, soluble low-density lipoprotein receptor and coronary artery disease: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Low-density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) is the primary pathway for removal of cholesterol from the circulation, pro-protein convertase subtilisin-like kexin type 9 (PCSK9) is a secreted protease that binds to and promotes degradation of the LDLR protein. The goal of this case-control study was to investigate the role of soluble LDLR (sLDLR) and PCSK9 in coronary artery disease (CAD) and investigate the relationship between these two indices and CAD.

METHODS

In a sample of 144 Chinese patients recruited between January 2018 and August 2018, 81 cases with mild and severe stenosis characterized by coronary angiograph (CAG) and 63 healthy controls were selected using the propensity score matching (PSM) based on demographics and medical history. sLDLR and PCSK9 concentrations were determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), Immuno-precipitation (IP) and western blotting. Multivariable logistic models were used to assess the associations between the degree of coronary artery stenosis and the biomarkers of interest.

RESULTS

Higher PCSK9 was found to be a significant predictor of coronary artery stenosis when comparing cases who had severe stenosis vs. controls (OR = 1.016, 95%CI: 1.009-1.024), and cases who had mild stenosis vs. controls (OR = 1.009, 95%CI: 1.003-1.015). sLDLR was positively corrected with PCSK9, which confounded the association between CAD and PCSK9. Compared to patients with mild-stenosis, patients with severe-stenosis also showed a higher level of PCSK9 (OR = 1.005, 95%CI: 1.007-1.013).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that elevated PSCK9 may contribute to the odds of developing CAD, with a higher degree of coronary artery stenosis.

Incremental net benefit of lipid-lowering therapy with PCSK9 inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cost-utility studies

INTRODUCTION

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) are monoclonal antibodies that lower lipid levels. Although several cardiovascular outcome trials reported the effectiveness of PCSK9i, the evidence on cost-effectiveness is mixed. We systematically reviewed the evidence and synthesized incremental net benefit (INB) to quantify pooled cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

We systematically searched for full economic evaluation studies reporting outcomes of PCSK9i compared with other lipid-lowering pharmacotherapies. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Tufts Registry for eligible studies up to August 2021, adhering to preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. We pooled INB in US$ with a 95% confidence interval using a random-effects model. We assessed heterogeneity using the Cochran Q test and I² statistics. We used the modified economic evaluations bias (ECOBIAS) checklist to evaluate the quality of selected studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were eligible, mainly from high-income countries (HIC). The pooled INB (INBp) of PCSK9i versus other lipid-lowering pharmacotherapies were estimated from n = 24 comparisons, with high heterogeneity (I² = 99.99). The INBp (95% CI) was $ - 78,207 (- 120,422; - 35,993) or € - 52,526 (- 80,879; - 24,174) (conversion factor 1 US$ = 0.67€) which shows that PCSK9i was not significantly cost-effective when compared to other standard therapies. On subgroup analysis PCSK9i was significantly not cost-effective [$ - 23,672 (- 24,061; - 23,282)] compared to other lipid-lowering pharmacotherapies in HICs, upper-middle-income countries [$ - 158,412 (- 241,738; - 75,086)] or when the target population was CVD [$ - 109,343 (- 158,968; - 59,717)]; and for treatment subgroup: against placebo or no treatment [$ - 79,018 (- 79,649; - 78,388 PCSK9)] and standard statin therapies [$ - 131,833 (- 173,449; - 90,216)]. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the findings are not robust for HICs and the treatment subgroups.

CONCLUSION

PCSK9 inhibitors are not cost-effective compared to other lipid-lowering pharmacotherapies in HICs. Further, current pieces of evidence are predominantly from HICs with largely lacking evidence from other economies.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

ID CRD42020206043.

Efficacy evaluation of PCSK9 monoclonal antibody (Evolocumab) in combination with Rosuvastatin and Ezetimibe on cholesterol levels in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD): A retrospective analysis from a single center in China

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9(PCSK9) monoclonal antibody (Mab; Evolocumab) has been reported to inhibit low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lipoprotein(a) [LP(a)] in coronary heart diseases (CHD) patients in America, Europe and Japan. However, little is known about the effect of Evolocumab in Chinese population. This retrospective study in Chinese CHD patients compared the efficacy without or with Evolocumab therapy added to the conventional treatment with a statin (Rosuvastatin) and a gut cholesterol absorption inhibitor (Ezetimibe).

METHODS

CHD patients from our hospital were divided into three therapeutic groups, A) the statin monotherapy group (10 mg Rosuvastatin every night); B) the statin/cholesterol absorption inhibitor group (10 mg Rosuvastatin and 10 mg Ezetimibe daily); and C) the triple therapy with PCSK9 Mab group (10 mg Rosuvastatin daily, 10 mg Ezetimibe daily, and 140 mg Evolocumab once 2 weeks). The plasma lipid data were collected at 0, 4, 12, and 24 Week(s). The Graphpad Prism 7 program was used to perform all the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 103 patients 91 were eligible for further evaluation with 31 in group A, 31 in group B, and 29 in group C. The plasma LDL-C levels were reduced only by 33.82% in the Rosuvastatin monotherapy group, 52.13% in the Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe group, and 73.59% in the Evolocumab/Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe group (P < 0.0001) at 24 weeks compared to the prior therapy levels. Neither the statin therapy alone (5.95%; P = 0.6), nor the double therapy (5.27%; P = 0.7) affected LP(a) levels. In contrast, addition of Evolocumab to the double therapy significantly decreased LP(a) level by 37.2% (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Addition of Evolocumab to the standard double therapy in Chinese CHD patients improved the efficacy in LDL-C reduction when compared to Rosuvastatin alone or in Rosuvastatin/Ezetimibe double therapy. Furthermore, the addition of Evolocumab lowered LP(a) level in Chinese CHD patients.

Cost-Effectiveness of Evolocumab Therapy for Myocardial Infarction: The Chinese Healthcare Perspective

PURPOSE

Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors are an indispensable lipid-lowering treatment option, but their cost-effectiveness has been questioned. This study aimed to perform a health economic evaluation of evolocumab versus placebo in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) in China.

METHODS

A Markov cohort state-transition model was developed in decision analysis software to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) saved. The simulation subjects could undergo non-fatal MI and/or stroke, or vascular or non-vascular death event. We integrated the Chinese population-specific demographics and event rates with the risk reduction of evolocumab based on the FOURIER trial and/or lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Age-related change, event costs and utilities were included from published sources.

RESULTS

At its current list price [33,748 Chinese yuan (CNY) annually per person], the ICER for evolocumab therapy was 927,713 CNY per QALY gained when integrating the FOURIER trial with absolute reduction of LDL-C. The probability of cost-effectiveness of evolocumab versus placebo was 1.96%, with a generally accepted threshold of 212,676 CNY per QALY gained. A reduction in acquisition price by approximately 70% (to less than 10,255 CNY annually) was needed to be cost-effective. Alternative scenario analyses of therapeutic benefit showed that the ICER for evolocumab in MI patients with uncontrolled familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) was 187,736 CNY per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

Evolocumab in patients with MI was not cost-effective based on the price in 2019 in China; however, treatment with evolocumab was more favorable in MI patients with FH.

Novel Treatment Strategies for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

New pharmacological therapies for the treatment of cardiovascular disease (CVD) have emerged in recent years. The high rates of CVD and the need for long-term treatment to decrease risk factors makes cost-effectiveness crucial for their successful long-term implementation.

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed cost-effectiveness studies of novel pharmacological treatments (ezetimibe, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 [PCSK9] inhibitors, omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids [n-3 PUFAs], and the cardiovascular polypill) compared with standard care for the secondary prevention of CVD.

METHODS

We searched seven databases and the reference list of selected literature reviews for eligible cost-effective analyses (CEA) published between January 2009 and January 2020 that evaluated the above novel treatments versus standard care. Two independent reviewers performed the screening and evaluation in accordance with the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. Cost results were adapted to 2018 US dollars (US$) to facilitate comparisons between studies. Consideration of cost-effectiveness was based on the original study criteria.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies were included in this review, most of them adopting a healthcare perspective. Studies evaluating ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors and n-3 PUFAs assessed their addition to standard care compared with standard care alone, while studies analysing the polypill evaluated the replacement of multiple monotherapies for a fixed-dose combination. Ten studies reported on ezetimibe, fifteen evaluated PCSK9 inhibitors, five focused on n-3 PUFAs and seven on the polypill. From a healthcare perspective, ezetimibe was cost effective in 62.5% of the studies (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios [ICERs] ranged from US$27,195 to US$204,140), n-3 PUFAs in 60% (ICERs from US$57,128 to US$139,082) and the cardiovascular polypill in 100% (ICERs from dominant to US$30,731) compared with standard care. Conversely, only 10% of the studies considered PCSK9 inhibitors cost effective compared with standard care from a healthcare perspective (ICERs ranged from US$231,119 to US$1,223,831). Additionally, ezetimibe was cost effective in 50% of the studies, PCSK9 inhibitors in 33% and the polypill in 50% of the studies adopting a societal perspective. The key model-related parameters predicting cost-effectiveness included drug cost, time horizon, and the baseline risk of cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on current pricing and willingness-to-pay thresholds, most CEA studies considered ezetimibe, n-3 PUFAs and the polypill to be cost effective compared with standard care but not PCSK9 inhibitors for secondary prevention of CVD.