Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Valutazione economica di ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel nel trattamento di pazienti con sindrome coronarica acuta

Economic evaluation of ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel in ACS patients

  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Italian Research Articles

Abstract

Ticagrelor is a new generation drug for the prevention of thrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study is a cost-effectiveness analysis of ticagrelor vs clopidogrel (the current standard) in the economic perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) in Italy. It is based on the clinical outcomes of an international, randomized, double-blind trial (PLATO study).

One year treatment with ticagrelor is more expensive than with the comparator, but 11 additional lives are saved out of 1,000 patients. Assuming a life expectancy of 15.3 years for each survivor, and assessing effectiveness on the base of death from cardiovascular causes, an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €8,327 per life-year gained (LYG) can be computed. When weighting survival with utility, an ICER results of €10,621 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Based on death from any cause, both ICERs decrease respectively to €6,542 and €8,345.

Extensive sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of the results, which generally remain well below — or, exceptionally, within — the adopted acceptability threshold range (25,000–10,000 Euros per QALY).

Ticagrelor can be considered a cost-effective alternative for the treatment of patients with ACS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliografia

  1. American Heart Association. http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3010002. Accesso del 7 settembre 2010

  2. American Heart Association. Heart disease and stroke statistics: 2006 update. http://www.americanheart.org/downloadable/heart/113535864858055–026_HS_Stats06book.pdf. Accesso del 9 settembre 2010

  3. OECD Factbook 2008. Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics. http://www.SourceOECD.org/factbook. Accesso del 9 settembre 2010

  4. Widimsky P, Wijns W, Fajadet J, et al., on behalf of the European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions. Reperfusion Therapy for ST elevation acute myocardial infarction in Europe: description of the current situation in 30 countries. Eur Heart J 2010; 31: 943–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. ISTAT. Annuario Statistico Italiano 2006. http://www.istat.it/dati/catalogo/20061109_00/. Accesso del 9 settembre 2010

  6. Rosengren A, Wallentin L, Gitt AK, et al. Sex, age, and clinical presentation of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 663–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Taylor MJ, Scuffham PA, McCollan PL, et al. Acute coronary syndromes in Europe: 1-year costs and outcomes. Curr Med Res Opin 2007; 23: 495–503

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hatre DL, Silverton M. Recovery from acute coronary syndromes: hidden snares to resuming normality. Aust Fam Physician 2001; 30: 959–63

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bosanquet N, Jönsson B, Fox KA. Costs and cost effectiveness of low molecular weight heparins and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21: 1135–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bassand JP, Hamm CV, Ardissino D, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: the Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 1598–660

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Van de Werf F, Bax J, Betriu A, et al. Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with persistent ST-segment elevation: the Task Force on the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2008; 29: 2909–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jernberg T, Payne CD, Winters KJ, et al. Prasugrel achieves greater inhibition of platelets and a lower rate of non-responders compared with clopidogrel in aspirin-treated patients with stable coronary heart disease. Eur Heart J 2006; 27: 1166–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Yusuf S, Zhao F, Mehta SR, et al. Effects of clopidogrel in addition to aspirin in patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 1506–716

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kuliczkowski V, Witkowski A, Polonski L, et al. Interindividual variability in the response to oral antiplatelet drugs: a position paper of the Working Group on antiplatelet drug resistance appointed by the Section of Cardiovascular Interventions of the Polish Cardiac Society, endorsed by the Working Group on Thrombosis of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 425–35

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wallentin L, Varenhorst C, James S, et al. Prasugrel achieves greater and faster P2Y12 receptor-mediated platelet inhibition than clopidogrel due to more efficient generation of its active metabolite in aspirin-treated patients with coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2008; 29: 21–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2001–15

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Schomig A. Ticagrelor — is there need for a new player in the antiplatelet-therapy field? N Engl J Med, 2009; 361: 1108–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Storey RF, Husted S, Harringyon RA, et al. Inhibition of platelet aggregation by AZD6140, a reversible oral P2Y12 receptor antagonist, compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50: 1852–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Stone GW. Ticagrelor in ACS: redefining a new standard of care? Lancet 2010; 375: 263–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  21. James S, Akerblom A, Cannon CP, et al. Comparison of ticagrelor, the first reversible oral P2Y(12) receptor antagonist, with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes: rationale, design, and baseline characteristics of the PLATelet inhibition and patients Outcomes (PLATO) trial. Am Heart J 2009; 157: 599–605

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A, et al. Ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1045–57

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1418–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. The GUSTO Investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 673–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pryor DB, Harrell FE, Rankin JS, et al. Trends in the presentation, management, and survival of patients with coronary artery disease: the Duke database for cardiovascular disease. In: Higgins M, Luepker RV, eds. Trends in coronary heart disease mortality: the influence of medical care. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988: 76–87

    Google Scholar 

  26. van Domburg RT, Sonnonschein K, Nieuwlaat R, et al. Sustained benefit 20 years after reperfusion therapy in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 46: 15–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Simoons ML, Serruys PW, van den Brand M, et al. Improved survival after early thrombolysis in acute myocardial infarction. A randomised trial by the Inter-university Cardiology Institute in the Netherlands. Lancet 1985; 2: 578–82

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Allen LA, O’Donnell CJ, Camargo CA, et al. Comparison of long-term mortality across the spectrum of acute coronary syndromes. Am Heart J 2006; 151: 1065–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Dawber TR, Moore FE, Mann GV. Coronary heart disease in the Framingham study. Am J Pub Health Nation Health 1957; 47: 4–24

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Peeters A, Mamun AA, Willekens F, et al. A cardiovascular life history. A life course analysis of the original Framingham Heart Study cohort. Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 458–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Brüggenjürgen B, Lindgren P, Ehlken B, et al. Long-term cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment elevation in Germany. Eur J Health Econ 2007; 8: 51–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mehta SR, Yusuf S, on behalf of the CURE Steering Committee. The Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events (CURE) trial programme. Rationale, design and baseline characteristics including a meta-analysis of the effects of thienopyridines in vascular disease. Eur Heart J 2000; 21: 2033–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37: 53–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Szende A, Oppe M, Devlin N, eds. EQ-5D value sets: inventory, comparative review and user guide. Dordrecht NL: Springer, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  35. Arnold SV, Morrow DA, Wang K, et al., on behalf of the MERLIN-TIMI 36 Investigators. Effects of ranolazione on disease-specific health status and quality of life among patients with acute coronary syndromes: results from the MERLIN-TIMI 36 randomized trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2008; 1: 107–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kind P, Hardman G, Macran S. UK Population Norms for EQ-5D. Discussion Paper 172. York: The University of York, Centre for Health Economics, 1999

    Google Scholar 

  37. Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco. Elenco farmaci autorizzati. http://farmaco.agenziafarmaco.it/index.php. Accesso del 10 maggio 2011

  38. Conferenza delle Regioni e delle Province autonome. Compensazione interregionale della mobilità sanitaria. Versione in vigore per l’anno 2010. Roma, 5 maggio 2011. http://www.sanita.ilsole24ore.com/PrimoPiano/Detail/1367504. Accesso del 16 giugno 2011

  39. Ministero della salute. Ricoveri ospedalieri (SDO). Banca dati. http://www.salute.gov.it/ricoveriOspedalieri/ric_informazioni/default.jsp. Accesso del 1 giugno 2011

  40. Rappange DR, van Baal PH, van Exel NJ, et al. Unrelated medical costs in life-years gained: should they be included in economic evaluations of healthcare interventions? Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26: 815–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bos JM, Maarten J, Posta J, et al. Discounting health effects in pharmacoeconomic evaluation: current controversies. Pharmacoeconomics 2005; 23: 639–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. AIES, Associazione Italiana di Economia Sanitaria. Proposte di linee guida per la valutazione economica degli interventi sanitari. Pharmacoeconomics-Italian Research Articles 2009; 11: 89–93

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stewart S, Blue L, Walker A, et al. An economic analysis of specialist heart failure nurse management in the UK: can we afford not to implement it? Eur Heart J 2002; 23: 1369–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Ticagrelor at a glance. http://bi.adisinsight.com/RDI/ViewDocument.aspx. Accesso del 2 settembre 2011

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wolters Kluwer Health Italy S.r.l., Italia

    C. Lucioni & S. Mazzi

  2. AstraZeneca SpA (al tempo della realizzazione dello studio), Italia

    M. Gozzo

  3. AstraZeneca SpA, Italia

    C. Lazzeri

Authors
  1. C. Lucioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Mazzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Gozzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. Lazzeri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Lucioni.

Additional information

I peer-reviewers, per questo articolo, sono stati coordinati da Mario Eandi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lucioni, C., Mazzi, S., Gozzo, M. et al. Valutazione economica di ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel nel trattamento di pazienti con sindrome coronarica acuta. Pharmacoeconomics-Ital-Res-Articles 13, 53–64 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03320684

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03320684

Search

Navigation