Dataset Information

Cost-Effectiveness of Direct Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists for the Management of Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Based on Available "Real-World" Evidence: The Italian National Health System Perspective.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objective

The increasing availability of real-world evidence (RWE) about safety and effectiveness of direct non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) offers the opportunity to better understand the clinical and economic implications of DOACs versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). The objective of this study was to compare the economic implications of DOACs and VKAs using data from real-world evidence in patients with AF.

Methods

A Markov model simulating the lifetime course of patients diagnosed with non-valvular AF was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of DOACs (i.e., rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban) versus VKAs from the Italian National Health System (INHS) perspective. The model was made up of data from the literature and a meta-analysis of RWE on the incidence of stroke/systemic embolism (SE), major bleeding (MB), intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) and all-cause mortality (ACM); direct costs included drug costs, costs for drug monitoring, and management of events from official national lists. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were used to assess the robustness of the results.

Results

Results from the meta-analysis showed that apixaban had a high probability of being the most effective for stroke/SE, MB and ACM. Despite their higher acquisition costs, the cost-effectiveness analysis showed all DOACs involved a saving when compared with VKAs, with per-patient savings ranging between €4647 (rivaroxaban) to €6086 (apixaban). Moreover, all DOACs indicated a gain both in quality-adjusted life-years and life-years. According to PSA, findings related to apixaban were consistent, while for dabigatran and rivaroxaban PSA revealed a higher degree of uncertainty.

Conclusions

The beneficial effect of DOACs on containing events showed in RWE had the potential to offset drug-related costs, thus improving the sustainability of treatment for non-valvular AF in daily clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Lorenzoni V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7946694 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are associated with coronary artery calcification in low-risk populations, but their effect on calcification of large arteries remains uncertain. The effect of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) on vascular calcification is unknown. We investigated the influence of use of VKA and NOAC on calcification of the aorta and aortic valve. Methods In patients with atrial fibrillation without a history of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events who underwent computed tomographic angiography, the presence of ascending aorta calcification (AsAC), descending aorta calcification (DAC), and aortic valve calcification (AVC) was determined. Confounders for VKA/NOAC treatment were identified and propensity score adjusted logistic regression explored the association between treatment and calcification (Agatston score > 0). AsAC, DAC, and AVC differences were assessed in propensity score-matched groups. Results Of 236 patients (33% female, age: 58 ± 9 years), 71 (30%) used VKA (median duration: 122 weeks) and 79 (34%) used NOAC (median duration: 16 weeks). Propensity score-adjusted logistic regression revealed that use of VKA was significantly associated with AsAC (odds ratio [OR]: 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-4.59; p = 0.017) and DAC (OR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.22-4.67; p = 0.012) and a trend in AVC (OR: 1.92; 95% CI: 0.98-3.80; p = 0.059) compared with non-anticoagulation. This association was absent in NOAC versus non-anticoagulant (AsAC OR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.21-1.21; p = 0.127; DAC OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.36-1.76; p = 0.577; AVC OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.27-1.40; p = 0.248). A total of 178 patients were propensity score matched in three pairwise comparisons. Again, use of VKA was associated with DAC ( p = 0.043) and a trend toward more AsAC ( p = 0.059), while use of NOAC was not (AsAC p = 0.264; DAC p = 0.154; AVC p = 0.280). Conclusion This cross-sectional study shows that use of VKA seems to contribute to vascular calcification. The calcification effect was not observed in NOAC users.