Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor and generic clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome in Switzerland

QUESTION UNDER STUDY The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor and generic clopidogrel as add-on therapy to acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), from a Swiss perspective. METHODS Based on the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial, one-year mean healthcare costs per patient treated with ticagrelor or generic clopidogrel were analysed from a payer perspective in 2011. A two-part decision-analytic model estimated treatment costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), life years and the cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor and generic clopidogrel in patients with ACS up to a lifetime at a discount of 2.5% per annum. Sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS Over a patient's lifetime, treatment with ticagrelor generates an additional 0.1694 QALYs and 0.1999 life years at a cost of CHF 260 compared with generic clopidogrel. This results in an Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of CHF 1,536 per QALY and CHF 1,301 per life year gained. Ticagrelor dominated generic clopidogrel over the five-year and one-year periods with treatment generating cost savings of CHF 224 and 372 while gaining 0.0461 and 0.0051 QALYs and moreover 0.0517 and 0.0062 life years, respectively. Univariate sensitivity analyses confirmed the dominant position of ticagrelor in the first five years and probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed a high probability of cost-effectiveness over a lifetime. CONCLUSION During the first five years after ACS, treatment with ticagrelor dominates generic clopidogrel in Switzerland. Over a patient's lifetime, ticagrelor is highly cost-effective compared with generic clopidogrel, proven by ICERs significantly below commonly accepted willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of paclitaxel-coated balloons for endovascular therapy of femoropopliteal arterial obstructions.

PURPOSE To explore the cost-effectiveness of using drug-eluting balloon (DEB) angioplasty for the treatment of femoropopliteal arterial lesions, which has been shown to significantly lower the rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared with standard balloon angioplasty (BA). METHODS A simplified decision-analytic model based on TLR rates reported in the literature was applied to baseline and follow-up costs associated with in-hospital patient treatment during 1 year of follow-up. Costs were expressed in Swiss Francs (sFr) and calculated per 100 patients treated. Budgets were analyzed in the context of current SwissDRG reimbursement figures and calculated from two different perspectives: a general budget on total treatment costs (third-party healthcare payer) as well as a budget focusing on the physician/facility provider perspective. RESULTS After 1 year, use of DEB was associated with substantially lower total inpatient treatment costs when compared with BA (sFr 861,916 vs. sFr 951,877) despite the need for a greater investment at baseline related to higher prices for DEBs. In the absence of dedicated reimbursement incentives, however, use of DEB was shown to be the financially less favorable treatment approach from the physician/facility provider perspective (12-month total earnings: sFr 179,238 vs. sFr 333,678). CONCLUSION Use of DEBs may be cost-effective through prevention of TLR at 1 year of follow-up. The introduction of dedicated financial incentives aimed at improving DEB reimbursements may help lower total healthcare costs.