TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban in the prevention of venous thromboembolism
T2 - A Canadian analysis using the Ontario Ministry of Health Perspective
AU - McDonald, Heather
AU - Diamantopoulos, Alex
AU - Wells, Philip
AU - Lees, Michael
AU - Folkerts, Kerstin
AU - Forster, Fiona
AU - Ananthapavan, Jaithri
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to acknowledge Matthew Joynson and Claire Lavin (Rx Communications, Mold, UK) for medical writing assistance (funded by Bayer Pharma AG). Additional editorial and project management assistance was provided by Rx Communications, Mold, UK (funded by Bayer Pharma AG).
PY - 2012/10
Y1 - 2012/10
N2 - Objectives: A cost-effectiveness model for rivaroxaban evaluated the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis with rivaroxaban (a once-daily, orally administered Factor Xa inhibitor) vs enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR). This Canadian analysis was conducted using the Ontario Ministry of Health perspective over a 5-year time horizon. The model combined clinical data and builds upon existing economic models. Methods: The model included both acute VTE (represented as a decision tree) and long-term complications (represented as a Markov process with 1-year cycles) phases. The model allowed VTE event rates, quality-Adjusted life expectancy and direct medical costs to be estimated over a 5-year time horizon, based on current approved practice patterns in Canada. A number of one-way sensitivity analyses were performed on the baseline assumptions, including a comparison of rivaroxaban with dalteparin, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to address any uncertainty concerning model inputs. Results: When comparing equal durations of therapy, rivaroxaban dominated enoxaparin in the prevention of VTE events in patients undergoing THR and TKR, providing more benefit at a lower cost. Rivaroxaban was cost-effective when comparing 35 days' prophylaxis with 14 days' prophylaxis with enoxaparin following THR. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results of the economic analysis were robust to variations in key inputs. Rivaroxaban remained dominant during one-way sensitivity analyses comparing rivaroxaban with dalteparin after THR or TKR. Limitations: Although clinical trial data were used in the prophylaxis module, assumptions and values used in the post-prophylaxis and long-term complication (LTC) modules were based on several different literature sources; it was not always possible to source Canadian data. Conclusions: This economic analysis suggests that the use of rivaroxaban for the prophylaxis of VTE after THR or TKR in Canada was cost-effective.
AB - Objectives: A cost-effectiveness model for rivaroxaban evaluated the cost-effectiveness of prophylaxis with rivaroxaban (a once-daily, orally administered Factor Xa inhibitor) vs enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKR). This Canadian analysis was conducted using the Ontario Ministry of Health perspective over a 5-year time horizon. The model combined clinical data and builds upon existing economic models. Methods: The model included both acute VTE (represented as a decision tree) and long-term complications (represented as a Markov process with 1-year cycles) phases. The model allowed VTE event rates, quality-Adjusted life expectancy and direct medical costs to be estimated over a 5-year time horizon, based on current approved practice patterns in Canada. A number of one-way sensitivity analyses were performed on the baseline assumptions, including a comparison of rivaroxaban with dalteparin, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to address any uncertainty concerning model inputs. Results: When comparing equal durations of therapy, rivaroxaban dominated enoxaparin in the prevention of VTE events in patients undergoing THR and TKR, providing more benefit at a lower cost. Rivaroxaban was cost-effective when comparing 35 days' prophylaxis with 14 days' prophylaxis with enoxaparin following THR. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the results of the economic analysis were robust to variations in key inputs. Rivaroxaban remained dominant during one-way sensitivity analyses comparing rivaroxaban with dalteparin after THR or TKR. Limitations: Although clinical trial data were used in the prophylaxis module, assumptions and values used in the post-prophylaxis and long-term complication (LTC) modules were based on several different literature sources; it was not always possible to source Canadian data. Conclusions: This economic analysis suggests that the use of rivaroxaban for the prophylaxis of VTE after THR or TKR in Canada was cost-effective.
KW - Cost-effectiveness
KW - Health economics
KW - Orthopaedic surgery
KW - Rivaroxaban
KW - Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84864503151&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3111/13696998.2012.684116
DO - 10.3111/13696998.2012.684116
M3 - Review article
C2 - 22494267
AN - SCOPUS:84864503151
SN - 1369-6998
VL - 15
SP - 817
EP - 828
JO - Journal of Medical Economics
JF - Journal of Medical Economics
IS - 5
ER -