Evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of evolocumab in the FOURIER study: a Canadian analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Evolocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor, has been shown to reduce low-density lipoprotein levels by up to 60%. Despite the absence of a reduction in overall or cardiovascular mortality in the Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk (FOURIER) trial, some believe that, with longer treatment, such a benefit might eventually be realized. Our aim was to estimate the potential mortality benefit over a patient's lifetime and the cost per year of life saved (YOLS) for an average Canadian with established coronary artery disease. We also sought to estimate the price threshold at which evolocumab might be considered cost-effective for secondary prevention in Canada.Methods
We calibrated the Cardio-metabolic Model, a well-validated tool for predicting cardiovascular events and life expectancy, to the reduction in nonfatal events seen in the FOURIER trial. Assuming that long-term treatment will eventually result in mortality benefits, we estimated YOLSs and cost per YOLS with evolocumab treatment plus a statin compared to a statin alone. We then estimated the annual drug costs that would provide a 50% chance of being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay values of $50 000 and $100 000.Results
In secondary prevention in patients similar to those in the FOURIER study, evolocumab treatment would save an average of 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.41) life-years at a cost of $101 899 (95% CI $97 325-$106 473), yielding a cost per YOLS of $299 482. We estimate that to have a 50% probability of achieving a cost per YOLS below $50 000 and $100 000 would require annual drug costs below $1200 and $2300, respectively.Interpretation
At current pricing, the use of evolocumab for secondary prevention is unlikely to be cost-effective in Canada.
SUBMITTER: Lee TC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7869663 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of evolocumab when added to standard of care lipid-lowering treatment (LLT) for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) who cannot adequately control their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) despite optimized LLT in Canada.MethodsAn incremental cost-utility analysis was conducted using a Markov cohort state transition model adapted to the Canadian setting. Analyses were conducted from a public health and societal perspective using a lifetime time horizon for Canada. Scenario analyses were conducted on the basis of recommendations from the 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) dyslipidemia guidelines.ResultsIn ASCVD patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) and baseline LDL-C ≥ 1.8 mmol/L, adding evolocumab to optimized statin therapy with or without ezetimibe is associated with an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of $66,453 CAD. Furthermore, for every 100 patients treated with evolocumab for lifetime, adding evolocumab to optimized LLT will prevent approximately 52 cardiovascular (CV) events, of which seven would be fatal. The results are generally robust using univariate and simultaneous variation in model input parameters. Scenario analyses for patient populations as per the CCS guidelines suggest that evolocumab added to optimized LLT may be considered cost-effective, given an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) threshold of CAD$100,000 per QALY gained. Limitations associated with this analysis should be interpreted in the context of data and modeling assumptions used.ConclusionOverall, this analysis supports reimbursement of evolocumab by payers in patients with ASCVD who cannot reach LDL-C thresholds despite optimized LLT to reduce unnecessary fatal and non-fatal CV events.
| S-EPMC9239938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors, such as evolocumab, are cholesterol-lowering drugs effective in lowering lipid levels in high-risk patients with primary hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia.ObjectiveThis study assessed the cost effectiveness of evolocumab in combination with lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) compared with LLTs alone, from a public healthcare perspective in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA).MethodsA Markov cohort state transition model was used, incorporating efficacy estimates from the FOURIER clinical trial and baseline cardiovascular event rates observed in clinical practice. Other model inputs were extracted from the literature and Saudi sources.ResultsIn patients with clinically evident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 70 or ≥ 100 mg/dL, adding evolocumab to a maximally tolerated statin, with or without ezetimibe, was associated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of Saudi Arabian riyal (SAR) 109,274 ($US60,708) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and SAR75,163 ($US41,757) per QALY gained, respectively. The ICER was SAR22,391 ($US12,440) per QALY gained in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia. Sensitivity analysis results were robust to changes in model parameters and fell below the willingness-to-pay threshold of up to three times gross domestic product per capita in 2019 (SAR264,813 [$US147,118]).ConclusionEvolocumab can be considered a cost-effective treatment option for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia in the KSA.
| S-EPMC8864041 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2021 Canadian Cardiovascular Society guidelines recommend proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor therapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease whose low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentration remains ≥ 1.8 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. This retrospective and prospective observational study characterizes Canadian patients treated with evolocumab and describes its effectiveness and safety.MethodsBetween August 2017 and July 2019, a total of 131 patients initiated on evolocumab therapy were enrolled at 15 sites in Canada. Data were extracted from medical records every 3 months between 6 months prior to, and for 12 months following evolocumab therapy initiation, until July 6, 2020. Baseline and prospectively collected data are reported as available.ResultsA total of 131 patients were enrolled (59.5% male; mean age [standard deviation (SD)] 64.7 ± 10.6 years), most with a diagnosis of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or familial hypercholesterolemia (93.4%). Mean (± SD) LDL-C concentration at baseline was 3.7 (± 1.7) mmol/L (n = 119), with 58.0% of patients receiving a statin (36.6% high intensity). Mean (± SD) LDL-C concentration after evolocumab treatment was 1.6 (± 1.0) mmol/L (n = 120), representing a 58.7% decrease from baseline (n = 109). This level remained stable over 12 months. An LDL-C concentration < 1.8 mmol/L was achieved by 77.5% of patients. Persistence was 92%, and no serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.ConclusionsThese findings provide real-world evidence of guideline-recommended initiation of evolocumab therapy, as well as confirmation of its effectiveness and safety in a Canadian population. Evolocumab therapy can address a healthcare gap in the management of dyslipidemia, by increasing the proportion of patients achieving LDL-C goals recommended to lower cardiovascular risk.
| S-EPMC9207771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor evolocumab has been demonstrated to reduce the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death in patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. To our knowledge, long-term cost-effectiveness of this therapy has not been evaluated using clinical trial efficacy data.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of evolocumab in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease when added to standard background therapy.Design, setting, and participantsA Markov cohort state-transition model was used, integrating US population-specific demographics, risk factors, background therapy, and event rates along with trial-based event risk reduction. Costs, including price of drug, utilities, and transitional probabilities, were included from published sources.ExposuresAddition of evolocumab to standard background therapy including statins.Main outcomes and measuresCardiovascular events including myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and cardiovascular death, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net value-based price.ResultsIn the base case, using US clinical practice patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of at least 70 mg/dL (to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0259) and an annual events rate of 6.4 per 100 patient-years, evolocumab was associated with increased cost and improved QALY: incremental cost, $105 398; incremental QALY, 0.39, with an ICER of $268 637 per QALY gained ($165 689 with discounted price of $10 311 based on mean rebate of 29% for branded pharmaceuticals). Sensitivity and scenario analyses demonstrated ICERs ranging from $100 193 to $488 642 per QALY, with ICER of $413 579 per QALY for trial patient characteristics and event rate of 4.2 per 100 patient-years ($270 192 with discounted price of $10 311) and $483 800 if no cardiovascular mortality reduction emerges. Evolocumab treatment exceeded $150 000 per QALY in most scenarios but would meet this threshold at an annual net price of $9669 ($6780 for the trial participants) or with the discounted net price of $10 311 in patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels of at least 80 mg/dL.Conclusions and relevanceAt its current list price of $14 523, the addition of evolocumab to standard background therapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease exceeds generally accepted cost-effectiveness thresholds. To achieve an ICER of $150 000 per QALY, the annual net price would need to be substantially lower ($9669 for US clinical practice and $6780 for trial participants), or a higher-risk population would need to be treated.
| S-EPMC5710446 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLittle is known about the heterogeneity in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (LDL-C) lowering with proprotein convertase subtilisin kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor medications.ObjectiveTo evaluate the interindividual variability in LDL-C reduction with the PCSK9 inhibitor drug evolocumab.Design, setting, and participantsWe examined the percentage change in LDL-C levels from baseline in the Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research With PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk (FOURIER) trial, a placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial of the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab in patients with stable atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease who were taking statin medications. Patients in either treatment arm who had high baseline LDL-C variability during screening and either did not receive the study drug, altered their background lipid-lowering therapy regimen, or had no LDL-C level sample in week 4 were excluded from the primary analysis. Analyses in the patients were stratified by treatment arm. Data was collected from 2013 to 2016, and data were analyzed from January 2018 to November 2018.Main outcomes and measuresInterindividual variation in percent reduction in LDL-C with evolocumab.ResultsThere were 27 564 individuals in the cohort; after exclusions for baseline variability (n = 3524) or alterations in background lipid therapy and other causes (n = 2272), 21 768 patients remained. At week 4, the median percent reduction in LDL-C levels from baseline was 66% (interquartile range, 54%-76%; median [interquartile range] baseline value, 90 [79-105] mg/dL; postchange value, 31 [21-44] mg/dL) with evolocumab. During the first year, a total of 10 325 of 10902 patients in the evolocumab group (94.7%) had a reduction 50% or greater in LDL-C levels, 10 669 of 10 902 (97.9%) had a reduction 30% or more, and 10 849 of 10 902 (99.5%) had any reduction in LDL-C levels. Fifty-three patients (0.5%) had no apparent reduction in LDL-C levels. In the placebo arm, the median LDL-C reduction was 4% (interquartile range, 6% increase to 13% reduction; baseline median [IQR] value, 90 [79-106] mg/dL; postchange value, 87 [74-103] mg/dL) at 4 weeks. Waterfall plots showed notable variability in the top and bottom 5% of patients for both evolocumab and placebo groups, with large changes in LDL-C levels in the placebo group (increases of ≥25%, 531 patients [4.9%]; decreases of ≥25%, 985 patients [9.1%]). At 4 weeks, the placebo-adjusted reductions in LDL-C levels with evolocumab were 50% or greater in 9839 of 10 866 patients (90.5%) and 30% or greater in 10 846 of 10 866 patients (99.8%). Results were consistent across clinically relevant subgroups.Conclusions and relevanceThere appears to be a highly consistent robust reduction in LDL-C levels with evolocumab use.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01764633.
| S-EPMC6439677 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of high-efficiency on-line hemodiafiltration (OL-HDF) compared with low-flux hemodialysis (LF-HD) for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) based on the Canadian (Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal) arm of a parallel-group randomized controlled trial (RCT), the CONvective TRAnsport STudy.MethodsAn economic evaluation was conducted for the period of the RCT (74 months). In addition, a Markov state transition model was constructed to simulate costs and health benefits over lifetime. The primary outcome was costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The analysis had the perspective of the Quebec public healthcare system.ResultsA total of 130 patients were randomly allocated to OL-HDF (n = 67) and LF-HD (n = 63). The cost-utility ratio of OL-HDF versus LF-HD was Can$53,270 per QALY gained over lifetime. This ratio was fairly robust in the sensitivity analysis. The cost-utility ratio was lower than that of LF-HD compared with no treatment (immediate death), which was Can$93,008 per QALY gained.ConclusionsHigh-efficiency OL-HDF can be considered a cost-effective treatment for ESRD in a Canadian setting. Further research is needed to assess cost effectiveness in other settings and healthcare systems.
| S-EPMC4661220 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesHearing loss is one of the most prevalent congenital disorders among children. Many countries have implemented universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) for the early diagnosis and treatment of hearing loss. Despite widespread implementation, the value for money of UNHS is unclear due to lack of cost and outcomes data from rigorous study designs. The objective of this research is to conduct a within-study cost-effectiveness analysis of UNHS compared with targeted screening (targeting children with risk factors of hearing loss) from the Australian healthcare system perspective. This evaluation is the first economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of UNHS compared to targeted screening using real-world data from a natural experiment.DesignThe evaluation assumed the Australian healthcare system perspective and considered a time horizon of 5 years. Utilities were estimated using responses to the Health Utilities Index Mark III. Screening costs were estimated based on the Victorian Infant Hearing Screening Program. Ongoing costs were estimated based on administrative data, while external data sources were used to estimate costs related to hearing services. Missing data were handled using the multiple imputation method. Outcome measures included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and four language and communication-related outcomes: Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability, Progressive Achievement Test, and comprehensive, expressive, and total language scores based on the Preschool Language Scale.ResultsOn average, the UNHS cost an extra Australian dollar (A$)22,000 per diagnosed child and was associated with 0.45 more QALYs per diagnosed child compared with targeted screening to 5 years, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of A$48,000 per QALY gained. The ICERs for language outcomes lay between A$3,900 (for expressive language score) and A$83,500 per one-point improvement in language score (for Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability). UNHS had a 69% probability of being more cost-effective compared to targeted screening at a willingness to pay threshold of A$60,000 per QALY gained. ICERs were most sensitive to the screening costs.ConclusionsThe evaluation demonstrated the usefulness of a within-study economic evaluation to understand the value for money of the UNHS program in the Australian context. Findings from this evaluation suggested that screening costs were the key driver of cost-effectiveness results. Most outcomes were not significantly different between UNHS and targeted screening groups. The ICER may be overestimated due to the short follow-up period. Further research is warranted to include long-term resource use and outcome data, late diagnosis, transition and remission between severity levels, and timing of diagnosis and treatment.
| S-EPMC9275830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrent strategies for risk stratification of patients with acute myeloid leukemia assign approximately 40% of patients to the intermediate-risk group, where uncertainty about optimal therapy still persists.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of a HMGA2 prognostic test based on HMGA2+/HMGA2- expression, which improves genetic risk stratification in acute myeloid leukemia, and compare this test with the current standard of care in Canada.MethodsA cost-effectiveness model was developed from the Canadian National Healthcare Service and societal perspective using data from the Quebec Leukemia Cell Bank, published literature, and physician surveys. The model includes a lifetime horizon assessing the HMGA2 test vs. standard of care.ResultsThe HMGA2 test outperformed the standard of care at all time horizons culminating with estimated improvements of 1.92 and 3.12 months in leukemia-free survival and overall survival, respectively. Costs associated with the HMGA2 test were consistently lower, except diagnostic costs, routine medical costs, and costs related to infections and false positives. From a societal perspective, total lifetime costs were $161,358 CAD and $151,908 CAD with the standard of care and the HMGA2 test, respectively. The incremental quality-adjusted life-year gain was 0.138, which led to dominance over the standard of care. Deterministic sensitivity analyses confirmed the results of the base-case scenario. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses revealed that for a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 CAD, the probability of cost effectiveness was 87.19%.ConclusionsThe HMGA2 test is estimated to improve leukemia-free survival and overall survival outcomes, and yield costs savings from a healthcare system and societal perspective.
| S-EPMC6885508 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) is the preferred treatment option for adrenal lesions, considering the improved patients outcomes, due to the reduced postoperative morbidity and postoperative pain, the faster recovery and the shorter length of hospital stay. The widespread diffusion of robotic technology led to the development and standardization of robot-assisted approach to adrenalectomy. However, to date, no clear benefit from the use of the robot-assisted approach has been found. The higher costs remain an important drawback and limit the implementation of robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) programs. This review summarizes the current available data regarding RA including its operative outcomes, advantages and drawbacks in comparison with conventional LA, evaluating its cost-effectiveness.
| S-EPMC7347830 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Randomized trials have shown marked reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), when evolocumab is administered. We hypothesized that evolocumab added to standard of care (SOC) vs SOC alone is cost-effective in the treatment of patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH) or atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) with or without statin intolerance and LDL-C >100 mg/dL. Using a Markov cohort state transition model, primary and recurrent CVD event rates were predicted considering population-specific trial-based mean risk factors and calibrated against observed rates in the real world. The LDL-C-lowering effect from population-specific phase 3 randomized studies for evolocumab was used together with estimated LDL-C-lowering effect on CVD event rates per 38.67-mg/dL LDL-C lowering from a statin-trial meta-analysis. Costs and utilities were included from published sources. Evolocumab treatment was associated with both increased cost and improved quality-adjusted life-years (QALY): HeFH (incremental cost: US$153 289, incremental QALY: 2.02, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: US$75 863/QALY); ASCVD (US$158 307, 1.12, US$141 699/QALY); and ASCVD with statin intolerance (US$136 903, 1.36, US$100 309/QALY). Evolocumab met both the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and World Health Organization (WHO) thresholds in each population evaluated. Sensitivity and scenario analyses confirmed that model results were robust to changes in model parameters. Among patients with HeFH and ASCVD with or without statin intolerance, evolocumab added to SOC may provide a cost-effective treatment option for lowering LDL-C using ACC/AHA intermediate/high value and WHO cost-effectiveness thresholds. More definitive information on the clinical and economic value of evolocumab will be available from the forthcoming CVD outcomes study.
| S-EPMC5074319 | biostudies-literature