[Clinical and economic consequences of using dabigatran or rivaroxaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Atrial fibrillation is a supraventricular arrhythmia that increases the risk of ischemic stroke and other thromboembolic events. Recently new treatment options have emerged whose cost-effectiveness relative to conventional therapy (warfarin) is well demonstrated. This study compares the clinical benefits and economic costs associated with the new oral anticoagulants most used in Portugal: dabigatran and rivaroxaban.

METHODS

The results of an indirect comparison of the RE-LY and ROCKET AF trials, which enabled differences in the efficacy of dabigatran and rivaroxaban to be determined, were used in a Markov model simulating patient outcomes in terms of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, acute myocardial infarction and intra- and extracranial bleeding.

RESULTS

The use of dabigatran is associated with better clinical results. The reduction in events is reflected in longer survival (8.41 vs. 8.26 years) and more quality-adjusted life years (5.87 vs. 5.74), while the lower daily treatment cost and the reduction in event-related costs lead to a saving of 367 euros per patient from a societal perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that dabigatran is a dominant alternative, i.e., it produces better clinical results at a lower cost. Sensitivity analysis demonstrates that the results are robust even considering the uncertainty inherent in an indirect comparison. It can thus be concluded that in clinical practice in Portugal the use of dabigatran is to be preferred to the use of rivaroxaban.

Systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Novel oral anticoagulants are emerging options for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic diseases. They are increasingly used in clinical practice due to their simplicity of use and clinical benefits, but an important step is to evaluate their cost-effectiveness. The aim of the AFFORD study (A Review of Cost EFFectiveness of Novel ORal Anticoagulant Drugs) was to perform a systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies of novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted by searching the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Knowledge databases to identify all cost-effectiveness studies of novel oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in AF.

RESULTS

The search identified 27 studies, 18 with dabigatran, three with apixaban, two with rivaroxaban and four with at least two of these drugs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were 30 405 ± 16 101 euros per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for dabigatran 110 mg, 17 566 ± 16 902 euros/QALY for dabigatran 150 mg, 8102 ± 3252 euros/QALY for age-adjusted dabigatran, 11 897 ± 3341 euros/QALY for apixaban and 17 960 ± 12 005 euros/QALY for rivaroxaban.

CONCLUSION

The present systematic review demonstrates that novel oral anticoagulants are cost-effective for stroke prevention in AF.

[Economic evaluation of dabigatran for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

To estimate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of dabigatran in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Portugal.

METHODOLOGY

A Markov model was used to simulate patients' clinical course, estimating the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolism, myocardial infarction, and intra- and extracranial hemorrhage. The clinical parameters are based on the results of the RE-LY trial, which compared dabigatran with warfarin, and on a meta-analysis that estimated the risk of each event in patients treated with aspirin or with no antithrombotic therapy.

RESULTS

Dabigatran provides an increase of 0.331 life years and 0.354 quality-adjusted life years for each patient. From a societal perspective, these clinical gains entail an additional expenditure of 2978 euros. Thus, the incremental cost is 9006 euros per life year gained and 8409 euros per quality-adjusted life year.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that dabigatran reduces the number of events, especially the most severe such as ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, as well as their long-term sequelae. The expense of dabigatran is partially offset by lower event-related costs and by the fact that INR monitoring is unnecessary. It can thus be concluded that the use of dabigatran in clinical practice in Portugal is cost-effective.