Análisis coste-efectividad de eplerenona en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca post-infarto agudo de miocardio

  • Jose L. López-Sendón
  • David Martí-Sánchez
  • Belén Martí
  • Itziar Oyagüez
  • Miguel Ángel Casado
Artículos de Investigación Original
  • 15 Downloads

Resumen

Objetivo:Eplerenona disminuye la mortalidad y reduce las hospitalizaciones en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca tras infarto agudo de miocardio (IAM). El objetivo del estudio fue determinar el coste-efectividad de incorporar eplerenona a la terapia médica estándar (TE) en el tratamiento de la insuficiencia cardiaca post-IAM, desde la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud español.

Métodos: Se analizó la relación coste-efectividad de eplerenona con TE frente a TE en términos de años de vida ganados (AVG) y años de vida ganados ajustados por calidad (AVAC). Los datos de eficacia se obtuvieron de los 16 meses de seguimiento medio del estudio EPHESUS. La supervivencia se estimó a partir de la base de datos epidemiológica Framingham. Los costes unitarios se obtuvieron de una base de datos sanitaria española (€ de 2008). Sólo se consideraron costes médicos directos. Se aplicó una tasa de descuento anual del 3% a costes y a resultados en salud. Se realizó un análisis de sensibilidad considerando los AVG a partir de las bases de datos epidemiológicas Saskatchewan y Worcester.

Resultados: El número de AVG con eplerenona fue de 0,1014 frente a TE. El coste total fue 660 € superior con eplerenona debido principalmente al coste de adquisición del fármaco (744 €). La relación coste-efectividad incremental de eplerenona frente a TE fue de 6.506 €/AVG y 9.759 €/AVAC. El análisis de sensibilidad confirmó la robustez de los resultados (10.374 €/AVG con Saskatchewan y 4.933€/AVG con Worcester).

Conclusiones: El empleo de eplerenona incorporada a la terapia estándar en pacientes con insuficiencia cardiaca secundaria a IAM es una terapia eficiente en España.

Palabras clave

insuficiencia cardiaca infarto de miocardio eplerenona coste-efectividad 

Abstract

Objective: Eplerenone reduces mortality and hospitalizations in patients with heart failure secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of adding eplerenone to standard treatment (ST) for post-AMI heart failure from a Spanish Health National System perspective.

Methods: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of eplerenone versus ST was assessed by means of the life years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. Efficacy data were obtained from the average follow-up period of 16 months in EPHESUS study. Survival estimates were based on the Framingham epidemiologic database. Unitary costs (€ 2008) were obtained from a Spanish cost database. Only direct medical costs were considered. A 3% annual discount rate was applied to cost and health benefits. Deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed based on LYG obtained from Saskatchewan and Worcester databases.

Results: Eplerenone versus ST yields 0.1014 LYG. Total cost with eplerenona was 660 € higher due to pharmacological cost (744 €). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of eplerenone versus ST was 6.506 €/LYG and 9.759 €/QALY. Robustness of results was confirmed by the sensitivity analyses (10.374 €/LYG with Saskatchewan and 4.933 €/LYG with Worcester).

Conclusions: The addition of eplerenone to ST in patients with heart failure secondary to AMI is an efficient therapy in Spain.

Key words

heart failure myocardial infarction eplerenone cost-effectiveness 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliografía

  1. 1.
    McKee PA, Castelli WP, McNamara PM, et al. The natural history of congestive heart failure: the Framingham study. N Engl J Med. 1971;285:1441–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Levy D, Kenchaiah S, Larson MG, et al. Long-term trends in the incidence of and survival with heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1397–402.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mosterd A, Hoes AW. Clinical epidemiology of heart failure. Heart. 2007;93:1137–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boix R, Almazán J, Medrano MJ. Mortalidad por insuficien-cia cardíaca en España, 1977–1998. Rev Esp Cardiol 2002;55:219–26.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rodriguez-Artalejo F, Banegas Banegas JR, Cuallar-Castillon P. Epidemiología de la insuficiencia cardíaca. Rev Esp Cardiol 2004;57:163–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muñiz García J, Crespo Leiro MG, Castro Beiras A. Insuficiencia cardíaca en España. Epidemiología e importancia del grado de adecuación a las guías de práctica clínica. Rev Esp Cardiol 2006;(supl 6):2F–8F.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Steg G, Dabbous OH, Feldman LJ, et al. Determinants and Prognostic Impact of Heart Failure Complicating Acute Coronary Syndromes: Observations from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE). Circulation 2004;109:494–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weir RA, McMurray JJ. Epidemiology of heart failure and left ventricular dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction. Curr Heart Fail Rep. 2006;3:175–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weir RA, McMurray JJ, Velazquez EJ. Epidemiology of heart failure and left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction: prevalence, clinical characteristics, and prognostic importance. Am J Cardiol. 2006;97:13F–25F.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Worner F, Viles D, Díez-Aja S. Epidemiología y pronóstico de la insuficiencia cardíaca postinfarto. Rev Esp Cardio 2006;(supl 6):3B–14B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pitt B, Zannad F, Remme WJ, Cody R, Castaigne A, Pérez A, et al. For the Randomized Aldactone Evolution Study Investigators. The effect of spironolactone on morbidity and mortality in patiients with severe heart failure. N Engl J Med 1999; 341; 709–717.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pitt B, Remme W, Zannad F, et al. Epleronone, a selective aldosterone blocker, in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1309–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jimenez Navarro MF, García Pinilla JM, Montiel Trujillo A, et al. Tratamiento médico de la insuficiencia cardíaca por disfunción sistólica. Rev Esp Cardiol 2006;6(supl):46F–52F.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    López-Sendón J, López de Sa E. Problemas en la aplicación de las guías de práctica clínica en la insuficiencia cardíaca post-infarto. Rev Esp Cardiol 2006;(supl 6):59B–68B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dickstein K, Cohen-Solal A, Filippatos G, et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008. The task force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008 of the European society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association of the ESC (HFA) and endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). Eur J Heart Fail. 2008;10:933–89.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spertus JA, Tooley J, Jones P, et al. Expanding the outcomes in clinical trials of heart failure: The quality of life and economic components of EPHESUS (EPlerenone’s neuroHormonal Efficacy and Survival Study). Am Heart J. 2002;143:636–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weintraub WS, Zhang Z, Mahoney EM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of eplerenone compared with placebo in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure. Circulation. 2005;111:1106–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kvasz Z, Spertus JA, Pitt B, et al. Cost-effectiveness of eplerenone by age and sex subgroups in patients with heart failure after myocardial infarction: results from EPHESUS [abstract no 1753]. Circulation 2004; 110(suppl 17):367.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Szucs TD, Holm MV, Schwenkglenks M, et al. Cost-effec. tiveness of eplerenona in patients with left ventricular dysfunction after myocardial infarction-an analysis of the EPHESUS study from a Swiss perspective. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2006;20:193–204.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pouvourville G, Solesse A, Beillat M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of aldosterone blockade with eplerenone in patients with heart failure after acute myocardial infarction in the French context: The EPHESUS study. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2008;101:515–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    López Bastida J, Oliva J, Antoñanzas F, et al. Propuesta de guía para la evaluación económica aplicada a las tecnologías sanitarias. Gac Sanit. 2010;24:154–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    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;23:45–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Downey W, Beck P, McNutt M, et al. Health databases in Saskatchewan. In: Strol BL, ed. Pharmacoepidemiology. 3rd ed. Chichester, UK: Wiley;2000:325–45.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Saskatchewan Health. Health Services Databases: Information document, 2004. Saskatchewan Health Services Databases: information document, June 2004. http://www.health.gov. sk.ca/mc_dp_phb_infodoc_0604.pdf.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pickett W, Day L, Hagel L, et al. The Saskatchewan Farm Injury Cohort: rationale and methodology. Public Health Rep. 2008;123:567–75.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Goldberg RJ, Yarzebski J, Lessard D, et al. A two decades (1975 to 1995) long experience in the incidence, in-hospital and long-term case-fatality rates of acute myocardial infarction: a community-wide perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:1533–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Spencer FA, Meyer TE, Goldberg RJ, et al. Twenty year trends (1975–1995) in the incidence, in-hospital and long-term death rates associated with heart failure complicating acute myocardial infarction: a community-wide perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;34:1378–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rabin R, De Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQoL group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 31.
    Consejo General de Colegios de Farmacéuticos. Catálogo de Especialidades Farmacéuticas. Consejo Plus 2007. Madrid: Consejo General de Colegios de Farmacéuticos 2007. Disponible en: http://www.portalfarma.com.Google Scholar
  30. 32.
    Sacristán JA, Oliva J, Del Llano J, et al. ¿Qué es una tecnología sanitaria eficiente en España? Gac San 2002;16:334–43.Google Scholar
  31. 33.
    Barbieri M, Drummond M, Willke R, et al. Variability of cost-effectiveness estimates for pharmaceuticals in Western Europe: lessons for inferring generalizability. Value Health 2005;8:10–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 34.
    De Cock E, Miratvilles M, González-Juanatey JR, et al. Valor umbral del coste por año de vida ganado para recomendar la adopción de tecnologías sanitarias en España: evidencias procedentes de una revisión de la literatura. Pharmacoeconomics Spanish Res Art 2007;4:97–107.Google Scholar
  33. 35.
    Croom KF, Plosker GL. Eplerenone: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in patients with post-myocardial infarction heart failure. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23:1057–1072.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 36.
    Weir R, McMurray JJ. Treatments that improve outcome in the patient with heart failure, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, or both after acute myocardial infarction. Heart. 2005;91(Suppl 2):17–20.Google Scholar
  35. 37.
    Struthers A, Krum H, Williams GH. A comparison of the aldosterone-blocking agents eplerenone and spironolactone. Clin Cardiol 2008;31:153–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 38.
    Badia X, Bueno H, González Juanatey JR, et al. Análisis de la relación coste-efectividad a corto y largo plazo de clopidogrel añadido a terapia estándar en pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo en España. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2005;58:1385–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 39.
    Latour-Pérez J, Navarro-Ruiz A, Ridao-López M, et al. Using clopidogrel in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients: a cost-utility analysis in Spain. Value Health. 2004;7:52–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 40.
    Díez Manglano J. Análisis coste-efectividad y coste-beneficio del tratamiento con bloqueadores beta de la insuficiencia cardíaca congestiva en España. Rev Clin Esp. 2005;205:149–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 41.
    Hart WM, Rubio-Terrés C, Margalet Fernández I, et al. Análisis coste-efectividad del tratamiento con Ramipril de pacientes con alto riesgo de padecer eventos cardiovasculares en España. An Med Interna. 2002;19:515–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 42.
    Soto Alvarez J, González Vilchez F. Análisis coste-efectividad del uso de espironolactona en el tratamiento de la insuficiencia cardíaca crónica. An Med Interna. 2001;18:421–5.Google Scholar
  41. 43.
    Goeree R, Burke N, O’Reilly D et al. Transferability of economic evaluations: approaches and factors to consider when using results form one geographic area for another. Curr Med Res Opin 2007;23:671–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jose L. López-Sendón
    • 1
  • David Martí-Sánchez
    • 2
  • Belén Martí
    • 3
  • Itziar Oyagüez
    • 4
  • Miguel Ángel Casado
    • 4
  1. 1.Hospital La PazMadridEspaña
  2. 2.Hospital Ramón y CajalMadridEspaña
  3. 3.PfizerEspaña
  4. 4.Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Iberia.Pozuelo de AlarcónEspaña

Personalised recommendations