Cost-effectiveness of apixaban in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) based on effectiveness data from a Spanish study in clinical practice (real-world evidence)
Rattachement africain : es, us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of apixaban in the prevention of stroke in adult patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), compared to other direct-acting oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban) and the vitamin K antagonist acenocoumarol, based on data on effectiveness in clinical practice in Spain obtained in the FANTASIIA study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A probabilistic Markov economic model (second-order Monte Carlo simulation) was performed to analyze the costs and utilities (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) associated with the compared treatments, according to the different probabilities of stroke, major bleeding and death observed in FANTASIIA. RESULTS: The cost per QALY gained in the patient treated with apixaban versus comparators ranged from €2,919 to €7,462. The probability of apixaban being cost-effective ranges from 91.1% (vs dabigatran 150 mg), 97.8% (vs dabigatran 110 mg), and 100% (vs. rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and acenocoumarol). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the FANTASIIA study, apixaban is a cost-effective treatment (below a willingness to pay of €25,000 per QALY gained) compared to dabigatran, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and acenocoumarol in treating patients with NVAF.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Cost-effectiveness of apixaban in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) based on effectiveness data from a Spanish study in clinical practice (real-world evidence)
- Date Crossref
- 01/02/2025
- Éditeur
- Informa UK Limited
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.