Cost-Effectiveness of Empagliflozin in Combination with Standard Care versus Standard Care Only in the Treatment of Heart Failure Patients in Finland.

cost-utility analysis heart failure with preserved ejection fraction heart failure with reduced ejection fraction sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor

Journal

ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR
ISSN: 1178-6981
Titre abrégé: Clinicoecon Outcomes Res
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101560564

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 10 10 2022
accepted: 16 12 2022
entrez: 13 1 2023
pubmed: 14 1 2023
medline: 14 1 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor empagliflozin has recently been shown to improve the outcomes of heart failure (HF) patients regardless of patient's left ventricular ejection fraction by reducing the combined risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for worsening HF. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adding empagliflozin to the standard care (SC) in comparison to SC only in the treatment of HF in Finland. The assessment was performed in the cost-utility framework using two Markov cohort state-transition models, one for HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and one for HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The models have been primarily developed based on the EMPEROR-Reduced and EMPEROR-Preserved trials which informed the modelled patient characteristics, efficacy of treatments in terms of associated risks for heart failure hospitalizations, cardiovascular (CV) and non-CV death, treatment related adverse events (AE), and state- and event-specific health-related quality of life weights (EQ-5D). Direct health care costs were estimated from Finnish published references. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from health care payer perspective based on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER; cost per quality adjusted life-year [QALY] gained) and probability of cost-effectiveness (at willingness-to-pay [WTP] of 35,000 euros/QALY). The ICER was reported as the weighted (HFrEF, 43.5%; HFpEF, 56.5%) average result of the two models. Empagliflozin + SC treatment increased the average quality-adjusted life-expectancy, and treatment costs of HF patients by 0.15 QALYs and 1,594 euros, respectively, when compared to SC. An additional QALY with empagliflozin was thus gained at a cost of 10,621 euros. The probability of empagliflozin + SC being cost-effective compared to placebo + SC was 77.6% and 83.5% with WTP of 35,000 and 100,000 euros/QALY, respectively. Empagliflozin is a cost-effective treatment for patients with HF in the Finnish health care setting.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36636485
doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S391455
pii: 391455
pmc: PMC9831000
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

1-13

Informations de copyright

© 2023 Hallinen et al.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

TH and ES are partners and employees of ESiOR Oy; SK is an employee of ESiOR Oy, which was commissioned by Boehringer Ingelheim Ky to perform this study. In these salaried positions, TH, ES and SK work with a variety of companies and are explicitly precluded from accepting any payment or honoraria directly from Boehringer Ingelheim Ky. ESiOR has carried out commissioned studies and health-economic analyses for several other pharmaceutical companies, food industry companies, device companies, research groups, health care organizations, and hospitals. VPH has received a consulting fee from Boehringer Ingelheim Ky, Finland. Mari Pesonen is an employee of Boehringer Ingelheim Finland Ky. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Références

JAMA Cardiol. 2017 Dec 1;2(12):1315-1321
pubmed: 29094152
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8;383(15):1413-1424
pubmed: 32865377
J Clin Oncol. 2022 Dec 10;40(35):4095-4106
pubmed: 35921606
Med Decis Making. 2006 Jul-Aug;26(4):410-20
pubmed: 16855129
Qual Life Res. 2006 Oct;15(8):1403-14
pubmed: 16960751
Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Aug;22(8):1523-34
pubmed: 16870077
Front Pharmacol. 2022 Apr 14;13:860109
pubmed: 35496294
Eur J Heart Fail. 2020 Nov;22(11):2147-2156
pubmed: 32749733
J Card Fail. 2007 Sep;13(7):560-8
pubmed: 17826647
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 17;10(3):e0119683
pubmed: 25781999
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2022 Sep;20(5):757-768
pubmed: 35821360
Circulation. 2022 May 3;145(18):e895-e1032
pubmed: 35363499
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2021 Aug 13;13:745-755
pubmed: 34413661
Eur J Heart Fail. 2009 Feb;11(2):163-9
pubmed: 19168514
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000 Apr;35(5):1245-55
pubmed: 10758967
J Card Fail. 2006 Aug;12(6):439-45
pubmed: 16911910
ESC Heart Fail. 2020 Dec;7(6):3910-3918
pubmed: 32909680
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2022 Oct;15(10):e008638
pubmed: 36252135
Value Health. 2016 Dec;19(8):1002-1008
pubmed: 27987626
JACC Heart Fail. 2018 Jul;6(7):552-560
pubmed: 29885952
N Engl J Med. 2021 Oct 14;385(16):1451-1461
pubmed: 34449189
ESC Heart Fail. 2019 Aug;6(4):603-612
pubmed: 31054212
ESC Heart Fail. 2020 Jun;7(3):1039-1048
pubmed: 32187879
Eur Heart J. 2021 Sep 21;42(36):3599-3726
pubmed: 34447992
Circ Heart Fail. 2013 Nov;6(6):1139-46
pubmed: 24130003
Invest New Drugs. 2022 Aug;40(4):798-809
pubmed: 35389145
N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 21;381(21):1995-2008
pubmed: 31535829

Auteurs

Taru Hallinen (T)

ESiOR Oy, Kuopio, Finland.

Santtu Kivelä (S)

ESiOR Oy, Kuopio, Finland.

Veli-Pekka Harjola (VP)

Emergency Medicine, University of Helsinki, Department of Emergency Medicine and Services, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

Mari Pesonen (M)

Boehringer Ingelheim Ky, Helsinki, Finland.

Classifications MeSH