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


Journal

International journal of cardiology
ISSN: 1874-1754
Titre abrégé: Int J Cardiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8200291

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 04 2023
Historique:
received: 06 09 2022
revised: 30 12 2022
accepted: 30 01 2023
pubmed: 4 2 2023
medline: 8 3 2023
entrez: 3 2 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

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

Sections du résumé

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.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36736672
pii: S0167-5273(23)00120-1
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2023.01.080
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Benzhydryl Compounds 0
dapagliflozin 1ULL0QJ8UC
empagliflozin HDC1R2M35U

Types de publication

Evaluation Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

83-89

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest No funding was received for this article. There was no potential competing interest.

Auteurs

Bao-Ngoc Nguyen (BN)

School of Pharmacy, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

Shweta Mital (S)

College of Pharmacy, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Shawn Bugden (S)

School of Pharmacy, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada.

Hai V Nguyen (HV)

School of Pharmacy, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Electronic address: hvnguyen@mun.ca.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH