Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Add-on Empagliflozin in Patients With Heart Failure and a Reduced Ejection Fraction From the Healthcare System's Perspective in the Asia-Pacific Region

Cost-Effectiveness of Sotagliflozin in SOLOIST-WHF

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of sotagliflozin in patients with diabetes and recent worsening of heart failure was shown in the SOLOIST-WHF trial. However, the cost-effectiveness of sotagliflozin in these patients has not been previously investigated.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of sotagliflozin in patients with diabetes and recent worsening of heart failure.

METHODS

Based on SOLOIST-WHF trial data (N = 1,222), the authors constructed a Markov model to estimate the lifetime impact of sotagliflozin from a U.S. health care sector perspective. Cost data were sourced from the National Inpatient Sample. Life expectancy was modeled from census data and modified by the mortality rate in SOLOIST-WHF. Fatal and nonfatal event rates were carried forward from the trial data. Utility was assessed from the published reports.

RESULTS

Lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 4.43 and 4.04 in the sotagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively, and lifetime costs were $220,113 and $188,198 in the sotagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively. The point estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $81,823 per QALY gained. The probability of being cost-effective was 3.6%, 67.5%, and 89.4% at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000, $100,000, and $150,000, respectively, per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with diabetes and recent worsening of heart failure, sotagliflozin is cost-effective in the U.S. using commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds. (Effect of Sotagliflozin on Cardiovascular Events in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes Post Worsening Heart Failure [SOLOIST-WHF]; NCT03521934).

Applications of SGLT2 inhibitors beyond glycaemic control

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were initially developed for their glucose-lowering effects and have shown a modest glycaemic benefit in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In the past decade, a series of large, robust clinical trials of these therapies have demonstrated striking beneficial effects for various care goals, transforming the chronic disease therapeutic landscape. Cardiovascular safety studies in people with T2DM demonstrated that SGLT2 inhibitors reduce cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure. Subsequent trials in participants with heart failure with reduced or preserved left ventricular ejection fraction demonstrated that SGLT2 inhibitors have beneficial effects on heart failure outcomes. In dedicated kidney outcome studies, SGLT2 inhibitors reduced the incidence of kidney failure among participants with or without diabetes. Post hoc analyses have suggested a range of other benefits of these drugs in conditions as diverse as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease, kidney stone prevention and anaemia. SGLT2 inhibitors have a generally favourable adverse effect profile, although patient selection and medication counselling remain important. Concerted efforts are needed to better integrate these agents into routine care and support long-term medication adherence to close the gap between clinical trial outcomes and those achieved in the real world.

Opportunistic Screening for Asymptomatic Left Ventricular Dysfunction With the Use of Electrocardiographic Artificial Intelligence: A Cost-Effectiveness Approach

BACKGROUND

The burden of asymptomatic left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) is greater than that of heart failure; however, a cost-effective tool for asymptomatic LVD screening has not been well validated. We aimed to prospectively validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled electrocardiography (ECG) algorithm for asymptomatic LVD detection and evaluate its cost-effectiveness for opportunistic screening.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, patients undergoing ECG at outpatient clinics or health check-ups were enrolled in 2 hospitals in Taiwan. Patients were stratified into LVD (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%) risk groups according to a previously developed ECG algorithm. The performance of AI-ECG was used to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of LVD screening compared with no screening. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and sensitivity analyses were used to examine the cost-effectiveness and robustness of the results.

RESULTS

Among the 29,137 patients, the algorithm demonstrated areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.984 and 0.945 for detecting LVD within 28 days in the 2 hospital cohorts. For patients not initially scheduled for ECG, the algorithm predicted future echocardiograms (high-risk, 46.2%; medium-risk, 31.4%; low-risk, 14.6%) and LVD (high-risk, 26.2%; medium-risk, 3.4%; low-risk, 0.1%) at 12 months. Opportunistic screening with AI-ECG could result in a negative ICER of -$7,439 for patients aged 65 years, with consistent cost-savings across age groups and particularly in men. Approximately 91.5% of the cases were found to be cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $30,000 in the probabilistic analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of AI-ECG for asymptomatic LVD risk stratification is promising, and opportunistic screening in outpatient clinics has the potential to reduce costs.

The Impact of the Withdrawal of SGLT2 Inhibitors on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Heart Failure

Background: The clinical impact of the withdrawal of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) on all-cause readmission in patients with heart failure remains unknown. Methods: We enrolled a total of 212 consecutive patients who were hospitalized for heart failure and received SGLT2i during their index hospitalization between February 2016 and July 2022. Of these patients, 51 terminated SGLT2i during or after their index hospitalization. We evaluated the prognostic impact of the withdrawal of SGLT2i on the primary outcome, which was defined as the all-cause readmission rate/times. Results: Over a median of 23.2 months, all-cause readmission occurred in 38 out of 51 patients (74.5%) withdrawn from SGLT2i and 93 out of 161 patients (57.8%) with continuation of SGLT2i (p = 0.099). The incidence of all-cause readmissions per year was 0.97 [0-1.50] in patients withdrawn from SGLT2i and 0.50 [0-1.03] in patients with continuation of SGLT2i (p = 0.030). There was no significant difference in total medical costs (62,906 [502-187,246] versus 29,236 [7920-180,305] JPY per month, p = 0.866) between both patient groups. Conclusions: Termination of SGLT2i may be associated with incremental all-cause readmission and no benefit in reducing total medical costs.

Real-World Eligibility and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Empagliflozin for Heart Failure in Korea

BACKGROUND

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) approved empagliflozin for reducing cardiovascular mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with both HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, limited data are available on the generalizability of empagliflozin to clinical practice. Therefore, we evaluated real-world eligibility and potential cost-effectiveness based on a nationwide prospective HF registry.

METHODS

A total of 3,108 HFrEF and 2,070 HFpEF patients from the Korean Acute Heart Failure (KorAHF) registry were analyzed. Eligibility was estimated by inclusion and exclusion criteria of EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Reduced) and EMPagliflozin outcomE tRial in Patients With chrOnic heaRt Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) trials and by FDA & EMA label criteria. The cost-utility analysis was done using a Markov model to project the lifetime medical cost and quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

Among the KorAHF patients, 91.4% met FDA & EMA label criteria, while 44.7% met the clinical trial criteria. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of empagliflozin was calculated at US$6,764 per QALY in the overall population, which is far below a threshold of US$18,182 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness benefit was more evident in patients with HFrEF (US$5,012 per QALY) than HFpEF (US$8,971 per QALY).

CONCLUSION

There is a large discrepancy in real-world eligibility for empagliflozin between FDA & EMA labels and clinical trial criteria. Empagliflozin is cost-effective in HF patients regardless of ejection fraction in South Korea health care setting. The efficacy and safety of empagliflozin in real-world HF patients should be further investigated for a broader range of clinical applications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01389843.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin for heart failure patients across the full spectrum of ejection fraction in Spain: combined results of the EMPEROR-Preserved and EMPEROR-Reduced trials

BACKGROUND

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic condition with considerable clinical burden for patients and economic burden for healthcare systems. Treatment for HF is typically based on ejection fraction (EF) phenotype. The cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin + standard of care (SoC) compared to SoC has been examined for HF phenotypes below or above 40% EF separately, but not across the full spectrum of EF in Spain.

METHODS

The results of two preexisting, validated, and published phenotype-specific Markov cohort models were combined using a population-weighted approach, reflecting the incidence of each phenotype in the total HF population in Spain. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed by sampling each model's probabilistic results.

RESULTS

Empagliflozin + SoC compared to SoC resulted in increased life-years (LYs) (6.48 vs. 6.35), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) (4.80 vs. 4.63), and healthcare costs (€19,090 vs. €18,246), over a lifetime time horizon for the combined HF population in Spain. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was €5,089/QALY. All subgroup, scenario, and probabilistic ICERs were consistently below €10,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Empagliflozin is the first treatment with established efficacy and cost-effectiveness for HF patients across EF from the perspective of healthcare payers in Spain. Empagliflozin also proved to be cost-effective for all subgroups of patients included in the analysis.

[A clinical and economic analysis of the use of dapagliflozin in patients with chronic heart failure in the entire spectrum of left ventricular ejection fraction in the Russian Federation]

AIM

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin across the range of ejection fraction in patients with heart failure (HF) in Russian Federation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cost-effectiveness model was developed for estimate the use of dapagliflozin as part of standard therapy in patients with HF regardless of ejection fraction is unknown. The calculation of costs was carried out in a mathematical model adapted to the conditions of Russian healthcare system by using Russian costs inputs and patient population characteristics.

RESULTS

In the model, dapagliflozin therapy yielded a mean of 0.209 additional life-years compared with standard of care in 10 years horizon. The incremental cost of 1 additional life-year was 665,715 RUB, which does not exceed the threshold of willingness to pay 2,235,202 RUB.

CONCLUSION

Thus, the intensification of chronic HF therapy with dapagliflozin is cost effective. The use of dapagliflozin in a cohort of 1000 target patients over 10 years will avoid 146 hospitalizations and 39 emergency visits due to HF, as well as prevent 32 deaths from cardiovascular diseases.

Is Using Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors to Treat Adults with Chronic Heart Failure Cost-Effective? A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Studies

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to summarise the outcomes of economic evaluations that evaluated sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) in combination with standard of care compared to standard of care alone for patients with chronic heart failure.

METHODS

This systematic review searched MEDLINE, CINAHL+, Econlit, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry from inception to 31 December, 2022, for relevant economic evaluations, which were critically appraised using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and Bias in Economic Evaluation (ECOBIAS) criteria. The costs, quality-adjusted life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness thresholds were qualitatively analysed. Net monetary benefits at different decision thresholds were also computed. Subgroup analyses addressing the heterogeneity of economic outcomes were conducted. All costs were adjusted to 2023 international dollar (US$) values using the CCEMG-EPPI-Centre cost converter.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine economic evaluations that evaluated dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in patients with heart failure were found: 32 for the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40% and seven for LVEF > 40%. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors were cost-effective in all but two economic evaluations for LVEF > 40%. Economic outcomes varied widely, but favoured SGLT2i use in LVEF ≤ 40% over LVEF > 40% and upper-middle income over high-income countries. At a threshold of US$30,000/quality-adjusted life-year, ~ 90% of high to upper-middle income countries would consider SGLT2i cost-effective for heart failure treatment. The generalisability of study findings to low- and low-middle income countries is limited because of insufficient evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Using SGLT2i to treat heart failure is cost-effective, with more certainty in LVEF ≤ 40% compared to LVEF > 40%. Policymakers in jurisdictions where economic evaluations are not available could potentially use this study's findings to make informed decisions about treatment adoption.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

This study protocol was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42023388701).

Cost-Effectiveness of Glucose-Lowering Therapies as Add-on to Standard Care for People With Type 2 Diabetes in Malaysia

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various glucose-lowering therapies as add-on to standard care for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Malaysia.

METHODS

A state-transition microsimulation model was developed to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of 4 treatments: standard care, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from a healthcare provider's perspective over a lifetime horizon with 3% discount rate in a hypothetical cohort of people with T2D. Data input were informed from literature and local data when available. Outcome measures include costs, quality-adjusted life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and net monetary benefits. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainties.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime horizon, the costs to treat a person with T2D ranged from RM 12 494 to RM 41 250, whereas the QALYs gains ranged from 6.155 to 6.731, depending on the treatment. Based upon a willingness-to-pay threshold of RM 29 080 per QALY, we identified SGLT2i as the most cost-effective glucose-lowering treatment, as add-on to standard care over patient's lifetime, with the net monetary benefit of RM 176 173 and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of RM 12 279 per QALY gained. The intervention also added 0.577 QALYs and 0.809 LYs compared with standard care. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that SGLT2i had the highest probability of being cost-effective in Malaysia across varying willingness-to-pay threshold. The results were robust to various sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2i was found to be the most cost-effective intervention to mitigate diabetes-related complications.

Economic Evaluations of Guideline-Directed Medical Therapies for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Decision-analytic models (DAMs) with varying structures and assumptions have been applied in economic evaluations (EEs) to assist decision making for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) therapeutics. This systematic review aimed to summarize and critically appraise the EEs of guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMTs) for HFrEF.

METHODS

A systematic search of English articles and gray literature, published from January 2010, was performed on databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, NHSEED, health technology assessment, Cochrane Library, etc. The included studies were EEs with DAMs that compared the costs and outcomes of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid-receptor agonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The study quality was evaluated using the Bias in Economic Evaluation (ECOBIAS) 2015 checklist and Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklists.

RESULTS

A total of 59 EEs were included. Markov model, with a lifetime horizon and a monthly cycle length, was most commonly used in evaluating GDMTs for HFrEF. Most EEs conducted in the high-income countries demonstrated that novel GDMTs for HFrEF were cost-effective compared with the standard of care, with the standardized median incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $21 361/quality-adjusted life-year. The key factors influencing ICERs and study conclusions included model structures, input parameters, clinical heterogeneity, and country-specific willingness-to-pay threshold.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel GDMTs were cost-effective compared with the standard of care. Given the heterogeneity of the DAMs and ICERs, alongside variations in willingness-to-pay thresholds across countries, there is a need to conduct country-specific EEs, particularly in low- and middle-income countries, using model structures that are coherent with the local decision context.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin vs Empagliflozin for Treating Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction in the United States

PURPOSE

Evidence suggests that adding dapagliflozin to the prior standard of care is cost-effective compared with the standard of care alone. The latest guideline by the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Failure Society of America now recommends the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the relative cost-effectiveness of different SGLT2 inhibitors, including dapagliflozin and empagliflozin, has not been fully characterized. Therefore, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in patients with HFrEF from the US health care perspective.

METHODS

To compare the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in treating HFrEF, we used a state-transition Markov model. This model was used to estimate the expected lifetime costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for both medications. The model incorporated patients who were 65 years of age at entry and simulated their health outcomes over a lifetime horizon. The perspective of the analysis was based on the US health care system. To determine the health state transition probabilities, we used a network meta-analysis. All future costs and QALYs were discounted at an annual rate of 3%, and the costs were presented in 2022 US dollars.

FINDINGS

The base case analysis found that the incremental expected lifetime cost of treating patients with dapagliflozin vs empagliflozin was $37,684, resulting in an ICER of $44,763 per QALY. A price threshold analysis indicated that for empagliflozin to be the most cost-effective SGLT2 inhibitor at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY, it may require a 12% discount on its current annual prices.

IMPLICATIONS

The findings of this study indicate that dapagliflozin may offer greater lifetime economic value when compared with empagliflozin. Given that the current clinical practice guideline does not recommend one SGLT2 inhibitor over the other, it is essential to implement scalable strategies to ensure affordable access to both medications. By doing so, patients and health care practitioners can make informed decisions about their treatment options without being constrained by financial barriers.

Systematic Review of the Economic Evaluation of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors Used as Treatment in Patients with Heart Failure

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have been recently used as therapeutic agents for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Recent clinical trials have shown that they are beneficial for reducing the risk of cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization in patients with heart failure (HF). A comprehensive review regarding the cost-effectiveness of different SGLT2 inhibitors for HF treatment may be necessary to help clinicians and decision-makers select the most cost-effective HF treatment option.

OBJECTIVE

This study conducted a systematic review of economic evaluation studies of SGLT2 inhibitors for the treatment of patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

METHOD

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and EBSCOhost to identify published economic evaluation studies on SGLT2 inhibitors for HF treatment until May 2023. Studies on the economic evaluation of SGLT2 inhibitors in the treatment of HF were included. We extracted information such as country, population, intervention, type of model, health status, and conclusion of cost-effectiveness.

RESULT

Of the 410 studies, 27 were finally selected. All economic evaluation studies used the Markov model, and commonly included health status as stable HF, hospitalization due to HF, and death. All dapagliflozin studies focused on patients with HFrEF (n = 13), and dapagliflozin was cost-effective in 14 countries, but not in the Philippines. All empagliflozin studies focused on the patients with HFrEF also showed the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin (n = 11). However, empagliflozin use in patients with HFpEF was determined to be cost-effective in studies in Finland, China, and Australia studies but not in studies in Thailand and the USA.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the studies reported the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in patients with HFrEF. However, the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin differed from country to country regarding patients with HFpEF. We suggest that further economic evaluation of SGLT2 inhibitors should focus on patients with HFpEF in more countries.

Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin for the treatment of heart failure: a systematic review

Objective: This study aims to synthesize evidence on the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin for heart failure (HF). Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, EconLit, CNKI, Wanfang Data and Chongqing VIP were searched to identify original articles on cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin for HF, and literature surveillance ended on 20 November 2022. The reporting quality of the included articles was determined using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. Results: Of 97 articles identified, 11 studies published from 2020 to 2022 met the inclusion criteria, and the overall quality was accepted. The studies were conducted in 8 countries (China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Thailand, Australia, United States, and United Kingdom). This body of evidence suggested that add-on empagliflozin was cost effective for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) patients compared to standard of care alone in all the related studies including China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, Thailand, and Australia. For HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients, add-on empagliflozin was cost effective in China and Australia, but not in United States and Thailand. For HF with diabetes, add-on empagliflozin was cost effective in United Kingdom. Moreover, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were lower for patients with diabetes than without in subgroup analysis. In the uncertainty analysis of all included studies, the ICERs were most sensitive to the cost of empagliflozin and cardiovascular mortality, followed by the cost of the standard treatment, hazard ratio of HF hospitalization. Conclusion: add-on empagliflozin for HFrEF might be cost-effective or dominant compared with standard of care alone. However, for HFpEF patients, add-on empagliflozin might be cost-effective in China and Australian, but not cost-effective in United States and Thailand.

Cost-utility analysis of add-on dapagliflozin in heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction

AIMS

The DELIVER study demonstrates a significant improvement in cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure among heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF) or heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).Cost-utility of the adjunct use of dapagliflozin to standard therapy among patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF remains unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A five-state Markov mode was constructed to project health and clinical outcomes of the adjunct use of dapagliflozin to standard therapy among 65-year-old patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF. A cost-utility analysis was performed based on the DELIVER study and national statistical database. The cost and utility was inflated to 2022 by the usual discount rate of 5%. The primary outcomes were total cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) per patients as well as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Sensitivity analyses were also applied. Over a 15 year lifetime horizon, the average cost per patient was $7245.77 and $5407.55 in the dapagliflozin group and the standard group, along with an incremental cost of $1838.22. The average QALYs per patient was 6.00 QALYs and 5.84 QALYs in the dapagliflozin group and the standard group, along with an incremental QALYs of 0.15 QALYs, resulting in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $11 865.33/QALY, which was below the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of $12 652.5/QALY. The univariate sensitivity analysis indicated the cardiovascular death in both group was the most sensitive variable. Probability sensitivity analysis revealed that when the WTP thresholds were $12 652.5/QALY and $37 957.5/QALY, the probabilities of being cost-effective with dapagliflozin as an add-on were 54.6% and 71.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

From a public healthcare system perspective, the adjunct use of dapagliflozin to standard therapy among patients with HFpEF or HFmrEF generated advantages in cost-effectiveness in China at a WTP of $12 652.5/QALY, which promoted the rational use of dapagliflozin for heart failure.

Cost-effectiveness of adding empagliflozin to the standard of care for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction from the perspective of healthcare system in Malaysia

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of adding empagliflozin to the standard of care versus SoC alone for the treatment of patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) from the perspective of the Ministry of Health of Malaysia. Methods: A cohort-based transition-state model, with health states defined as Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Score (KCCQ-CSS) quartiles and death, was used to determine the lifetime direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for both treatment groups. The risks of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and health state utilities were estimated from the EMPEROR-Reduced trial. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was assessed against the cost-effectiveness threshold (CET) as defined by the country's gross domestic product per capita (RM 47,439 per QALY) to determine cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the key model parameters' uncertainty in respect to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. A scenario analysis was performed using health states as defined by the New York Heart Association classes. Results: Compared to SoC alone, empagliflozin + SoC for the treatment of HFrEF was more expensive (RM 25,333 vs. RM 21,675) but gained more health utilities (3.64 vs. 3.46), resulting in an ICER of RM 20,400 per QALY in the KCCQ-CSS model. A NYHA-based scenario analysis generated an ICER of RM 36,682 per QALY. A deterministic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model in identifying the empagliflozin cost as the main driver of cost-effectiveness. The ICER was reduced to RM 6,621 when the government medication purchasing prices were used. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis with a CET of 1xGDP per capita reached 72.9% probability for empagliflozin + SoC against SoC being cost-effective. Conclusion: Empagliflozin + SoC compared to SoC alone for the treatment of HFrEF patients was cost-effective from the perspective of the MoH of Malaysia.

Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin for treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

BACKGROUND

The differences in cost and efficacy between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in combination with standard of care (SoC) raise the question of which regimen would be cost-effective in treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin plus SoC (dapagliflozin-SoC) versus empagliflozin plus SoC (empagliflozin-SoC) or SoC alone for treatment of HFrEF.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin-SoC, empagliflozin-SoC, and SoC alone from the healthcare system perspective over a lifetime horizon. Data on efficacy of dapagliflozin-SoC, empagliflozin-SoC, and SoC were obtained from randomized controlled trials. Costs were measured in 2022 US dollars, and effectiveness was measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs).

RESULTS

Among three strategies, dapagliflozin-SoC was the most cost-effective strategy and dominated empagliflozin-SoC in an extended sense. Compared with SoC alone, dapagliflozin-SoC and empagliflozin-SoC had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) of $56,782 and $89,258 per QALY, respectively. Dapagliflozin-SoC cost more $5524 but yielded more 0.20 QALYs than empagliflozin-SoC, with the ICER of $27,861 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin-SoC, empagliflozin-SoC, and SoC alone did not depend on diabetic status. However, empagliflozin-SoC was no longer cost-effective versus SoC alone in HFrEF patients without CKD, and dapagliflozin-SoC was not cost-effective versus empagliflozin-SoC in HFrEF patients with CKD.

CONCLUSION

Dapagliflozin-SoC was cost-effective versus empagliflozin-SoC or SoC alone for treatment of HFrEF.

Sacubitril/Valsartan for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the Perspective of the Chinese Healthcare System

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sacubitril/valsartan has shown effectiveness in reducing hospitalization compared with valsartan in HFpEF patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We aimed to investigate the cost effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan as an alternative to valsartan in Chinese patients with heart failure with HFpEF.

METHODS

A Markov model was built to investigate the cost effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan as an alternative to valsartan in Chinese patients with HFpEF, from the healthcare system perspective. The time horizon was a lifetime, with a cycle length of 1 month. Costs were obtained from local information or published papers, discounted at a rate of 0.05 for future costs. The transition probability and utility were based on other studies. The primary outcome of the study was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Sacubitril/valsartan was considered cost effective if the ICER obtained was lower than the willingness-to-pay threshold of US dollars (US$) 12,551.5 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, as well as scenario analysis, were performed to test robustness.

RESULTS

Over a lifetime simulation, a 73-year-old Chinese patient with HFpEF could gain 6.44 QALYs (9.15 life-years) if sacubitril/valsartan plus standard treatment was administered, and 6.37 QALYs (9.07 life-years) if valsartan plus standard treatment was prescribed. The corresponding costs in both groups were US$12,471 and US$8663, respectively. The ICER was US$49,019/QALY (US$46,610/life-year), higher than the willingness-to-pay threshold. Sensitivity analyses and scenario analysis showed that our results were robust.

CONCLUSION

Adding sacubitril/valsartan to standard treatment as an alternative to valsartan for the treatment of HFpEF resulted in more effectiveness but higher costs. Sacubitril/valsartan was likely to not be cost effective in Chinese patients with HFpEF. The cost of sacubitril/valsartan needs to reduce to 34% of its current price to be cost effective in this population. Studies based on real-world data are needed to confirm our conclusions.

Vericiguat for the Treatment of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction Following a Worsening Heart Failure Event: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the Perspective of Chinese Healthcare Providers

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Approximately 38 million people worldwide experience heart failure (HF), with more than 10 million in China. Heart failure exacerbations are the main cause of HF hospitalization, and hospitalizations are the main driver of HF-associated costs. Vericiguat is recommended to treat patients who have had worsening HF despite guideline-directed medical therapy. However, the cost effectiveness of adding vericiguat to the standard treatment of this population in China remains unclear. The objective of this study was to investigate the cost effectiveness of adding vericiguat to standard treatment in patients with HF in the Chinese population METHODS: A lifetime Markov model with a 1-month cycle length was developed to compare the cost effectiveness of vericiguat plus standard treatment versus standard treatment alone in Chinese patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction following an HF exacerbation, from the perspective of Chinese healthcare providers. The clinical data were obtained from the VICTORIA study. The cost was accessed from our institution or studies conducted in China. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, representing incremental cost per incremental quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Vericiguat was considered highly cost effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio obtained was lower than 12,551 USD/QALY, cost effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was between 12,551 and 37,654.5 USD/QALY, and not cost effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was higher than 37,654.5 USD/QALY. A scenario analysis, one-way sensitivity analysis, and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to test the robustness of the results.

RESULTS

For a 67-year-old patient with HF following an HF exacerbation, the lifetime cost was 17,721 USD if vericiguat plus standard treatment was given, compared to 7907 USD if standard treatment alone was prescribed. The corresponding effectiveness was 2.20 QALY and 2.10 QALY, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of vericiguat plus standard treatment versus standard treatment alone in Chinese patients with HF was 89,429 USD/QALY, higher than the willingness-to-pay threshold of 37654.5 USD/QALY. The scenario analysis and sensitivity analysis showed the robustness of our results.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of vericiguat to the treatment regimen of Chinese patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction following an HF exacerbation resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $89,429 USD/QALY compared to standard treatment. This incremental cost-effectiveness ratio exceeds the willingness-to-pay threshold and thus, vericiguat was deemed not cost effective in the Chinese population.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Japan based on the EMPEROR-Reduced trial

BACKGROUND

Several studies have reported the cost-effectiveness of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in heart failure patients; however, their economic implications have not been sufficiently elucidated in Japan.

METHODS

A Markov cohort model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin plus standard of care (SoC) vs. SoC for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in Japan. Model inputs, including risk of clinical events, costs, and utilities based on Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Clinical Summary Scores were derived from EMPEROR-Reduced trial data, published literature, and a claims database.

RESULTS

The model predicted lower lifetime hospitalizations for heart failure (HHFs) and additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs; 0.21) for empagliflozin plus SoC vs. SoC in the overall population. Increased costs of ¥100,495/patient ($772/patient), primarily driven by higher drug costs of ¥239,558/patient ($1,840/patient), were largely offset by reduced HHF management costs of -¥166,160/patient (-$1,276/patient), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ¥469,672/QALY ($3,608/QALY). Results were consistent among subgroups and sensitivity analyses. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 82.5 % of runs were below the Japanese ICER reference value of ¥5,000,000/QALY ($38,408/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

Empagliflozin was demonstrated to be cost-effective for HFrEF patients in Japan based on the EMPEROR-Reduced trial data.

Economic evaluation of new blood pressure target for hypertensive patients in Taiwan according to the 2022 hypertension clinical practice guidelines of the Taiwan society of cardiology: a simulation modeling study

With the promising cardiovascular benefits in the STEP and SPRINT trials, the 2022 Taiwan's hypertension guidelines redefined the hypertension threshold as 130/80 mmHg and a universal blood-pressure target of <130/80 mmHg. This study's objective was to examine the cost-effectiveness of the intensive blood-pressure target for hypertensive patients using estimated lifetime medical costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) from the Taiwan national payer's perspective. We developed a lifetime Markov model comparing the intensive and conservative blood-pressure targets. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) against the willing-to-pay thresholds at the one-time [US$34,000(NT$1,020,000)] and three-time [US$100,000(NT$3,000,000)] gross domestic product per capita were defined as very cost-effect and only cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness in different age stratifications and cardiovascular risks treated with a more intensive target (120 mmHg) were examined in the subgroup analyses. The new blood-pressure treatment target produced more lifetime medical costs [US$31,589(NT$947,670) versus US$26,788(NT$803,640)] and QALYs (12.54 versus 12.25), and the ICER was US$16,589(NT$497,670), which was 99.1% and 100% probability of a very cost-effective and cost-effective strategy. The ICERs in all age stratifications had more than a 90% probability of being very cost-effective, and ICERs decreased with age. More intensive control in patients with high cardiovascular risks produced a lower ICER [US$14,547(NT$436,410)]. In conclusion, Taiwan's new blood-pressure treatment target can prevent more cardiovascular events with acceptable costs per QALY below the willing-to-pay thresholds. The cost-effectiveness of intensive control is consistent across different ages and more pronounced with the increase in age and cardiovascular risk.

Cost-Effectiveness of Adding Empagliflozin to Standard Treatment for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Patients in China

OBJECTIVES

Heart failure is a worldwide health problem and is the leading cause of hospitalization in older patients. Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) accounts for about 38% of heart failure cases. The latest EMPEROR-Preserved study shows that empagliflozin can reduce the risk of hospitalization in HFpEF, but whether empagliflozin is cost-effective in HFpEF in a Chinese setting remained uninvestigated.

METHODS

A simulation of lifetime horizon for a 72-year-old HFpEF patient was conducted using a Markov model. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Three times the per capita GDP of China was set as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. Empagliflozin was considered cost-effective if the ICER was below the WTP threshold, otherwise it would be regarded as not cost-effective. One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were used to assess uncertainty.

RESULTS

After a simulation of lifetime horizon, a 72-year-old HFpEF patient is expected to have an expected QALY of 4.80 in the empagliflozin group, and 4.67 QALY with standard treatment. The costs of empagliflozin and standard treatment are 34,987 (US$5423) and 27,027 (US$4189) Chinese Yuan (CNY), respectively, with an ICER of 63,746 (US$9881)/QALY, lower than the WTP threshold. One-way sensitivity and PSA show that our results are robust.

CONCLUSION

In Chinese HFpEF patients, adding empagliflozin to standard treatment is cost-effective, but studies based on real-world data are needed.

Cost-Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Chronic Kidney Disease in Japan

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for chronic kidney disease (CKD) has not been evaluated in Japan, so we analyzed the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, for CKD stages 3a and 3b.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We used the Markov model for CKD to assess the costs and benefits associated with and without dapagliflozin from a health system perspective. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). An ICER <5 million Japanese yen (JPY)/QALY was judged to be cost-effective. The effect of dapagliflozin on renal and cardiovascular events was based on published clinical trials. In patients with CKD stage 3a, the ICER of dapagliflozin over standard treatment was 4.03 million JPY/QALY gained. With a cost-effectiveness threshold of 5 million JPY/QALY gained, the cost-effectiveness probability of dapagliflozin over standard treatment was 52.6%. In patients with CKD stage 3b, the ICER of dapagliflozin over standard treatment was 0.12 million JPY/QALY gained. The cost-effectiveness probability of dapagliflozin over standard treatment was 75.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

The results seemed to show acceptable cost-effectiveness when dapagliflozin was used for CKD stage 3b. On the other hand, cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin for CKD stage 3a was ambiguous, and further validation is needed.

Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in China

AIM

To determine the pharmacoeconomics of empagliflozin for the treatment of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction in China and to provide evidence-based reference for clinical rational drug selection and medical decision-making.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used the Markov model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin for the treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the standard treatment in addition to empagliflozin (empagliflozin group) vs. the cost-effectiveness of the standard treatment alone (standard treatment group).

RESULTS

We found that each additional quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the empagliflozin group costed $3,842.20 more, which was less than China's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in 2021 ($11,981). The steady-state mortality in the two groups was the key factor affecting the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed that when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was one time the GDP per capita in 2021 ($11,981) and three times the GDP per capita in 2021 ($35,943), the probability of the empagliflozin group being cost-effective was 85.8 and 91.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the standard treatment alone, the addition of empagliflozin to the standard treatment was more cost-effective for the treatment of HFrEF in China.

An ex-ante cost-utility analysis of the deemed consent legislation compared to expressed consent for kidney transplantations in Nova Scotia

Background

This study was an ex-ante cost-utility analysis of deemed consent legislation for deceased organ donation in Nova Scotia, a province in Canada. The legislation became effective in January 2021. The study's objective was to assess the conditions necessary for the legislation change’s cost-effectiveness compared to expressed consent, focusing on kidney transplantation (KT).

Method

We performed a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model with a lifetime horizon. The study was from a Canadian payer perspective. The target population was patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in Atlantic Canada waitlisted for KT. The intervention was the deemed consent and accompanying health system transformations. Expressed consent (before the change) was the comparator. We simulated the minimum required increase in deceased donor KT per year for the cost-effectiveness of the deemed consent. We also evaluated how changes in dialysis and maintenance immunosuppressant drug costs and living donor KT per year impacted cost-effectiveness in sensitivity analyses.

Results

The expected lifetime cost of an ESKD patient ranged from $177,663 to $553,897. In the deemed consent environment, the expected lifetime cost per patient depended on the percentage increases in the proportion of ESKD patients on the waitlist getting a KT in a year. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) increased with deceased donor KT per year. Cost-effectiveness of deemed consent compared to expressed consent required a minimum of a 1% increase in deceased donor KT per year. A 1% increase was associated with an ICUR of $32,629 per QALY (95% CI: − $64,279, $232,488) with a 81% probability of being cost-effective if the willingness-to-pay (WTP) was $61,466. Increases in dialysis and post-KT maintenance immunosuppressant drug costs above a threshold impacted value for money. The threshold for immunosuppressant drug costs also depended on the percent increases in deceased donor KT probability and the WTP threshold.

Conclusions

The deemed consent legislation in NS for deceased organ donation and the accompanying health system transformations are cost-effective to the extent that they are anticipated to contribute to more deceased donor KTs than before, and even a small increase in the proportion of waitlist patients receiving a deceased donor KT than before the change represents value for money.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12962-022-00390-z.

Cost effectiveness analyses of pharmacological treatments in heart failure

In a rapidly growing and aging population, heart failure (HF) has become recognised as a public health concern that imposes high economic and societal costs worldwide. HF management stems from the use of highly cost-effective angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and β-blockers to the use of newer drugs such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), ivabradine, and vericiguat. Modelling studies of pharmacological treatments that report on cost effectiveness in HF is important in order to guide clinical decision making. Multiple cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) suggests that it is not only cost-effective and has the potential to improve long-term clinical outcomes, but is also likely to meet conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds in many countries. Similar promising results have also been shown for vericiguat while a cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) of empagliflozin has shown cost effectiveness in HF patients with Type 2 diabetes. Despite the recent FDA approval of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in HF, it might take time for these SGLT2i to be widely used in real-world practice. A recent economic evaluation of vericiguat found it to be cost effective at a higher cost per QALY threshold than SGLT2i. However, there is a lack of clinical or real-world data regarding whether vericiguat would be prescribed on top of newer treatments or in lieu of them. Sacubitril/valsartan has been commonly compared to enalapril in cost effectiveness analysis and has been found to be similar to that of SGLT2i but was not considered a cost-effective treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Thailand and Singapore with the current economic evaluation evidences. In order for more precise analysis on cost effectiveness analysis, it is necessary to take into account the income level of various countries as it is certainly easier to allocate more financial resources for the intervention, with greater effectiveness, in high- and middle-income countries than in low-income countries. This review aims to evaluate evidence and cost effectiveness studies in more recent HF drugs i.e., SGLT2i, ARNi, ivabradine, vericiguat and omecamtiv, and gaps in current literature on pharmacoeconomic studies in HF.

Cost-effectiveness of adding empagliflozin to the standard therapy for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction from the perspective of healthcare systems in China

Background

The Empagliflozin Outcome Trial in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (EMPEROR-Preserved) is the first randomized controlled trial to provide promising evidence on the efficacy of adding empagliflozin to the standard therapy in patients with Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF), but the cost-effectiveness of add-on empagliflozin treatment remains unclear.

Method

A Markov model using data from the EMPEROR-Preserved trial and national database was constructed to assess lifetime costs and utility from a China healthcare system perspective. The time horizon was 10 years and a 5% discount rate was applied. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) against willingness to pay (WTP) threshold was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness. A series of sensitivity analyses was applied to ensure the robustness of the results.

Results

Compared to standard therapy, the increased cost of adding empagliflozin from $4,645.23 to $5,916.50 was associated with a quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gain from 4.70 to 4.81, projecting an ICER of $11,292.06, which was lower than a WTP threshold of $12,652.5. Univariate sensitivity analysis revealed that the parameters with the largest impact on ICER were cardiovascular mortality in both groups, followed by the cost of empagliflozin and the cost of hospitalization for heart failure. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that when the WTP threshold was $12,652.5 and $37,957.5, the probability of being cost-effective for adding empagliflozin was 52.7% and 67.6%, respectively. Scenario analysis demonstrated that the cost of empagliflozin, the cost of hospitalization for heart failure, NYHA functional classes, and time horizon had a greater impact on the ICER.

Conclusion

At a WTP threshold of $12,652.5, the add-on empagliflozin treatment for HFpEF was cost-effective in healthcare systems in China, which promoted the rational use of empagliflozin for HFpEF.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Combination Empagliflozin and Standard Treatment Versus Standard Treatment Alone in Thai Heart Failure Patients with Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction

BACKGROUND

Clinical trials reported the benefit of empagliflozin when combined with standard treatment relative to cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with heart failure with reduced or preserved ejection fraction (HFrEF and HFpEF, respectively). We conducted a cost-utility analysis of combination empagliflozin and standard treatment (ST) versus ST alone in Thai HF patients with HFrEF or HFpEF.

METHODS

A Markov model was employed to capture lifetime direct medical costs and outcomes from a healthcare system perspective. Two cohorts (HFrEF and HFpEF) with an average age of 60 years were enrolled. The clinical inputs were the results of the EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved studies, and a Thai database. Costs were gathered from published studies or from a Thai hospital database. Utilities were obtained from published studies. All costs and outcomes were discounted at a rate of 3% per annum. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated, and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In patients with HFrEF, add-on empagliflozin yielded a life-year gain of 0.26, and a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gain of 0.20 at an increased total cost of 409.82 USD compared to ST alone [ICER: 69,218 THB/QALY (2064.98 USD/QALY gained)]. Among HFpEF patients, add-on empagliflozin yielded a life-year gain of 0.07, and a QALY gain of 0.05 at an increased total cost of 622.49 USD compared to ST alone [ICER: 395,826 THB/QALY (11,809 USD/QALY gained)].

CONCLUSIONS

At the local Thai threshold of 4773.27 USD/QALY, empagliflozin is a cost-effective add-on treatment for patients with HFrEF, but not for patients with HFpEF.