Cost-Effectiveness of Apixaban versus Other Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin in the Prevention of Thromboembolic Complications Among Finnish Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation
Loading...
Access rights
openAccess
URL
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä
This publication is imported from Aalto University research portal.
View publication in the Research portal (opens in new window)
View/Open full text file from the Research portal (opens in new window)
Other link related to publication (opens in new window)
View publication in the Research portal (opens in new window)
View/Open full text file from the Research portal (opens in new window)
Other link related to publication (opens in new window)
Date
2021
Major/Subject
Mcode
Degree programme
Language
en
Pages
11
745-755
745-755
Series
Clinicoeconomics and outcomes research, Volume 13
Abstract
Purpose: Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use for the prevention of thromboembolic complications in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) has increased steadily in Finland. DOACs have been shown to be cost-effective in comparison to warfarin, but published evidence of relative cost-effectiveness between DOACs is still scarce and mostly based on indirect comparisons of clinical trial evidence. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of apixaban to dabigatran, rivaroxaban and warfarin in a Finnish setting using real-life evidence where available. Patients and Methods: A lifetime Markov simulation model used previously in a published Finnish assessment comparing apixaban and warfarin was modified and updated with the relative effectiveness and safety data available from the real-world NAXOS-study and representative Finnish input data for patient characteristics, event risks, mortality, resource use, costs, and quality of life. Apixaban's cost-effectiveness was assessed from health care payer perspective (using 3% per year discount rate) based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER, cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] gained), probability of cost-effectiveness (at willingness-to-pay [WTP] of 35,000 euros/QALY), and net monetary benefit (NMB). Results: Apixaban increased the average modelled quality-adjusted life-expectancy and reduced the average total health care costs of AF patients when compared to warfarin (+0.14 QALYs, -3691 euros), dabigatran (+0.11 QALYs, -404 euros), and rivaroxaban (+0.03 QALYs, -43 euros). The resulting NMB of apixaban versus warfarin, dabigatran and rivaroxaban was 8723, 4168, and 1129 euros, respectively. The respective probabilities of apixaban being cost-effective against each comparator were 100%, 92.7%, and 64.0%. Conclusion: In this modelling study, apixaban dominated other anticoagulants in the Finnish real-life setting.Description
Keywords
apixaban, cost-utility, dabigatran, economic evaluation, rivaroxaban, warfarin, STROKE PREVENTION, DABIGATRAN ETEXILATE, SYSTEMIC EMBOLISM, RIVAROXABAN, EDOXABAN, SAFETY, IMPACT, RISK, CARE
Other note
Citation
Hallinen, T, Soini, E, Asseburg, C, Linna, M, Eloranta, P, Sintonen, S & Kosunen, M 2021, ' Cost-Effectiveness of Apixaban versus Other Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin in the Prevention of Thromboembolic Complications Among Finnish Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation ', ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research, vol. 13, pp. 745-755 . https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S317078