Cost-effectiveness analysis of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes in China


Autoři: Minghuan Jiang aff001;  Pengchao Li aff001;  Joyce Hoi-sze You aff003;  Xinglong Zheng aff004;  Jizhao Deng aff005;  Mingyue Zhao aff001;  Liuxin Feng aff006;  Yu Fang aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China aff001;  Center for Drug Safety and Policy Research, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China aff002;  School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T, Hong Kong, China SAR aff003;  Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China aff004;  Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Shaanxi Provincial People’s Hospital, Xi’an, China aff005;  Department of Pharmacy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China aff006
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(12)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224580

Souhrn

The use of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with lower rates of cardiovascular events but increased risks of bleeding complications. We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of aspirin therapy for primary prevention of CVD in Chinese DM patients. A life-long Markov model was developed to compare aspirin therapy (100mg daily) versus no use of aspirin in DM patients with no history of CVD. Model validation was conducted by comparing the simulated event rates with data reported in a clinical trial. Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYs) were the primary outcomes from the perspective of healthcare system in China. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the uncertainty of model inputs. Base-case analysis showed aspirin therapy was more costly (USD1,086 versus USD819) with higher QALYs gained (11.94 versus 11.86 QALYs) compared to no use of aspirin. The base-case results were sensitive to the odds ratio of all-cause death in aspirin therapy versus no use of aspirin. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that aspirin therapy gained an additional 0.066 QALYs (95% CI: -0.167 QALYs-0.286 QALYs) at higher cost by USD352 (95% CI: USD130-644)). Using 30,000 USD/QALY as willingness-to-pay threshold, aspirin therapy and no use of aspirin were the preferred option in 68.71% and 31.29% of 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, respectively. In conclusion, aspirin therapy appears to be cost-effective compared with no use of aspirin in primary prevention of CVD in Chinese DM patients.

Klíčová slova:

Cardiovascular diseases – Cost-effectiveness analysis – Economic analysis – Chinese people – Myocardial infarction


Zdroje

1. Shen X, Vaidya A, Wu S, Gao X. The diabetes epidemic in China: an integrated review of national surveys. Endocr Pract. 2016;22: 1119–29. doi: 10.4158/EP161199.RA 27295015

2. Weng J, Ji L, Jia W, Lu J, Zhou Z, Zou D, et al. Standards of care for type 2 diabetes in China. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016;32: 442–58. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.2827 27464265

3. Leggio M, Bendini MG, Caldarone E, Lombardi M, Severi P, D'Emidio S, et al. Low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes: benefit or risk? Diabetes Metab. 2018;44: 217–25. doi: 10.1016/j.diabet.2017.11.002 29257747

4. Baigent C, Blackwell L, Collins R, Emberson J, Godwin J, Peto R, et al. Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials. Lancet. 2009;373: 1849–60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60503-1 19482214

5. McNeil JJ, Wolfe R, Woods RL, Tonkin AM, Donnan GA, Nelson MR, et al. Effect of aspirin on cardiovascular events and bleeding in the healthy elderly. N Engl J Med. 2018;379: 1509–1518. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1805819 30221597

6. Gaziano JM, Brotons C, Coppolecchia R, Cricelli C, Darius H, Gorelick PB, et al. Use of aspirin to reduce risk of initial vascular events in patients at moderate risk of cardiovascular disease (ARRIVE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;392: 1036–1046. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31924-X 30158069

7. Bonaventura A, Liberale L, Montecucco F. Aspirin in primary prevention for patients with diabetes: Still a matter of debate. Eur J Clin Invest. 2018;48: e13001. doi: 10.1111/eci.13001 30011059

8. Bowman L, Mafham M, Wallendszus K, Stevens W, Buck G, Barton J, et al. Effects of aspirin for primary prevention in persons with diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2018;379: 1529–39. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804988 30146931

9. Kunutsor SK, Seidu S, Khunti K. Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality events in diabetes: updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabet Med. 2017;34: 316–27. doi: 10.1111/dme.13133 27086572

10. Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA, Buroker AB, Goldberger ZD, Hahn EJ, et al. 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;10: e596–e646.

11. Annemans L, Wittrup-Jensen K, Bueno H. A review of international pharmacoeconomic models assessing the use of aspirin in primary prevention. J Med Econ. 2010;13: 418–27. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2010.499731 20632895

12. Ogawa H, Nakayama M, Morimoto T, Uemura S, Kanauchi M, Doi N, et al. Low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic events in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2008;300: 2134–41. doi: 10.1001/jama.2008.623 18997198

13. Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.

14. National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China. China Health Statistics Yearbook 2018. Beijing: Peking Union Medical College Press; 2018.

15. Mahmoud AN, Gad MM, Elgendy AY, Elgendy IY, Bavry AA. Efficacy and safety of aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J. 2019;40: 607–617. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy813 30561620

16. Main C, Palmer S, Griffin S, Jones L, Orton V, Sculpher M, et al. Clopidogrel used in combination with aspirin compared with aspirin alone in the treatment of non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8: 1–156.

17. Wang Z, Li J, Wang C, Yao X, Zhao X, Wang Y, et al. Gender differences in 1-year clinical characteristics and outcomes after stroke: results from the China National Stroke Registry. PLoS One. 2013;8: e56459. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056459 23418571

18. Nikolic E, Janzon M, Hauch O, Wallentin L, Henriksson M. Cost-effectiveness of treating acute coronary syndrome patients with ticagrelor for 12 months: results from the PLATO study. Eur Heart J. 2013;34: 220–8. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs149 22719022

19. Michaud TL, Abraham J, Jalal H, Luepker RV, Duval S, Hirsch AT. Cost-effectiveness of a statewide campaign to promote aspirin use for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. J Am Heart Assoc. 2015;4.

20. Greving JP, Buskens E, Koffijberg H, Algra A. Cost-effectiveness of aspirin treatment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease events in subgroups based on age, gender, and varying cardiovascular risk. Circulation. 2008;117: 2875–83. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.735340 18506010

21. Pan CW, Sun HP, Zhou HJ, Ma Q, Xu Y, Luo N, et al. Valuing health-realted quality of life in type 2 diabetes patients in China. Med Decis Making. 2016;36: 234–41. doi: 10.1177/0272989X15606903 26400873

22. Guzauskas GF, Hughes DA, Bradley SM, Veenstra DL. A risk-benefit assessment of prasugrel, clopidogrel, and genotype-guided therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012;91: 829–37. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2011.303 22453194

23. Chang SS, Wu JH, Liu Y, Zhang T, Du X, Dong JZ, et al. In-hospital direct costs for thromboembolism and bleeding in Chinese patients with atrial fibrillation. Chronic Dis Transl Med. 2018;4: 127–134. doi: 10.1016/j.cdtm.2018.01.001 29988956

24. Li T, Wan X, Ma J, Wu B. Cost-effectiveness of primary prevention with statin treatment for Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes. Adv Ther. 2018;35: 2214–2223. doi: 10.1007/s12325-018-0823-9 30390239

25. National Bureau of Statistics of China. 2019 [cited 2019 Jan 3]. Database [Internet]. Available from http://data.stats.gov.cn/easyquery.htm?cn=C01.

26. World Health Organization. Geneva: The World Health Report 2002: reducing risks, promoting healthy life; 2002.

27. International Monetary Fund. People’s Republic of China. 2019 Apr [cited 12 April]. In: Counrty news at a glance [Internet]. Available from: https://www.imf.org/en/Countries/CHN.

28. Ito K, Avorn J, Shrank WH, Toscano M, Spettel C, Brennan T, et al. Long-term cost-effectiveness of providing full coverage for preventive medications after myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8: 252–9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.114.001330 25944633

29. Shiffman D, Slawsky K, Fusfeld L, Devlin JJ, Goss TF. Cost-effectiveness model of use of genetic testing as an aid in assessing the likely benefit of aspirin therapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Clin Ther. 2012;34: 1387–94. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.04.004 22560621

30. Lamotte M, Annemans L, Evers T, Kubin M. A multi-country economic evaluation of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24: 155–69. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200624020-00005 16460136

31. Tolla MT, Norheim OF, Memirie ST, Abdisa SG, Ababulgu A, Jerene D, et al. Prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease in Ethiopia: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2016;14: 10. doi: 10.1186/s12962-016-0059-y 27524939

32. Bibbins-Domingo K; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Aspirin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016;21;164: 836–45.

33. Pignone M, Alberts MJ, Colwell JA, Cushman M, Inzucchi SE, Mukherjee D, et al. Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in people with diabetes: a position statement of the American Diabetes Association, a scientific statement of the American Heart Association, and an expert consensus document of the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Circulation. 2010;121: 2694–701. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e3181e3b133 20508178

34. Piepoli MF, Hoes AW, Agewall S, Albus C, Brotons C, Catapano AL, et al. 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur Heart J. 2016;37: 2315–81. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw106 27222591

35. Pignone M, Earnshaw S, McDade C, Pletcher MJ. Effect of including cancer mortality on the cost-effectiveness of aspirin for primary prevention in men. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28: 1483–91. doi: 10.1007/s11606-013-2465-6 23681842

36. Dehmer SP, Maciosek MV, LaFrance AB, Flottemesch TJ. Health benefits and cost-effectiveness of asymptomatic screening for hypertension and high cholesterol and aspirin counseling for primary prevention. Ann Fam Med. 2017;15: 23–36. doi: 10.1370/afm.2015 28376458


Článek vyšel v časopise

PLOS One


2019 Číslo 12