Cargando…

Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the clinical and economic impact of drug-eluting endovascular treatment strategies for femoropopliteal artery disease compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Systematic literature search to pool target lesion revascularisations (TLR). Model-based per-patient cost impa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Katsanos, Konstantinos, Geisler, Benjamin P, Garner, Abigail M, Zayed, Hany, Cleveland, Trevor, Pietzsch, Jan B
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4874117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27160845
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011245
_version_ 1782433008205168640
author Katsanos, Konstantinos
Geisler, Benjamin P
Garner, Abigail M
Zayed, Hany
Cleveland, Trevor
Pietzsch, Jan B
author_facet Katsanos, Konstantinos
Geisler, Benjamin P
Garner, Abigail M
Zayed, Hany
Cleveland, Trevor
Pietzsch, Jan B
author_sort Katsanos, Konstantinos
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To estimate the clinical and economic impact of drug-eluting endovascular treatment strategies for femoropopliteal artery disease compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Systematic literature search to pool target lesion revascularisations (TLR). Model-based per-patient cost impact and quasi-cost-effectiveness projection over 24 months based on pooled TLRs and current reimbursement. SETTING: The UK's National Health Service (NHS). PARTICIPANTS: Patients presenting with symptomatic femoropopliteal disease eligible for endovascular treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline-recommended treatment with percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty (PTA) and bailout bare metal stenting (BMS) versus primary BMS placement, or drug-coated balloon (DCB), or drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: 24-month per-patient cost impact to NHS (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes: pooled 24-month TLR rates; numbers needed to treat (NNTs); cost per TLR avoided and estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in £ per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: N=28 studies were identified, reporting on 5167 femoropopliteal lesions. Over 24 months, DCB, DES and BMS reduced TLRs of de novo lesions from 36.2% to 17.6%, 19.4% and 26.9%, respectively, at an increased cost of £43, £44 and £112. NNTs to avoid 1 TLR in 24 months were 5.4, 6.0 and 10.8, resulting in cost per TLR avoided of £231, £264 and £1204. DCB was estimated to add 0.011 QALYs, DES 0.010 QALYs and BMS 0.005 QALYs, resulting in estimated ICERs of £3983, £4534 and £20 719 per QALY gained. A subset analysis revealed more favourable clinical and economic outcomes for a 3.5 µg/mm(2) DCB with urea excipient, compared with the rest of DCBs. A modest reduction of 10% in DCB and DES prices made drug-eluting treatments dominant. CONCLUSIONS: Widespread adoption of drug-eluting endovascular therapies for femoropopliteal disease would add meaningful clinical benefit at reasonable additional costs to the NHS. Based on currently available data, DCBs offer the highest clinical and economic value.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4874117
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48741172016-05-27 Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK Katsanos, Konstantinos Geisler, Benjamin P Garner, Abigail M Zayed, Hany Cleveland, Trevor Pietzsch, Jan B BMJ Open Health Economics OBJECTIVES: To estimate the clinical and economic impact of drug-eluting endovascular treatment strategies for femoropopliteal artery disease compared with current standard of care. DESIGN: Systematic literature search to pool target lesion revascularisations (TLR). Model-based per-patient cost impact and quasi-cost-effectiveness projection over 24 months based on pooled TLRs and current reimbursement. SETTING: The UK's National Health Service (NHS). PARTICIPANTS: Patients presenting with symptomatic femoropopliteal disease eligible for endovascular treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline-recommended treatment with percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty (PTA) and bailout bare metal stenting (BMS) versus primary BMS placement, or drug-coated balloon (DCB), or drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: 24-month per-patient cost impact to NHS (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes: pooled 24-month TLR rates; numbers needed to treat (NNTs); cost per TLR avoided and estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in £ per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). RESULTS: N=28 studies were identified, reporting on 5167 femoropopliteal lesions. Over 24 months, DCB, DES and BMS reduced TLRs of de novo lesions from 36.2% to 17.6%, 19.4% and 26.9%, respectively, at an increased cost of £43, £44 and £112. NNTs to avoid 1 TLR in 24 months were 5.4, 6.0 and 10.8, resulting in cost per TLR avoided of £231, £264 and £1204. DCB was estimated to add 0.011 QALYs, DES 0.010 QALYs and BMS 0.005 QALYs, resulting in estimated ICERs of £3983, £4534 and £20 719 per QALY gained. A subset analysis revealed more favourable clinical and economic outcomes for a 3.5 µg/mm(2) DCB with urea excipient, compared with the rest of DCBs. A modest reduction of 10% in DCB and DES prices made drug-eluting treatments dominant. CONCLUSIONS: Widespread adoption of drug-eluting endovascular therapies for femoropopliteal disease would add meaningful clinical benefit at reasonable additional costs to the NHS. Based on currently available data, DCBs offer the highest clinical and economic value. BMJ Publishing Group 2016-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4874117/ /pubmed/27160845 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011245 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/ This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
spellingShingle Health Economics
Katsanos, Konstantinos
Geisler, Benjamin P
Garner, Abigail M
Zayed, Hany
Cleveland, Trevor
Pietzsch, Jan B
Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK
title Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK
title_full Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK
title_fullStr Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK
title_full_unstemmed Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK
title_short Economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the UK
title_sort economic analysis of endovascular drug-eluting treatments for femoropopliteal artery disease in the uk
topic Health Economics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4874117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27160845
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011245
work_keys_str_mv AT katsanoskonstantinos economicanalysisofendovasculardrugelutingtreatmentsforfemoropoplitealarterydiseaseintheuk
AT geislerbenjaminp economicanalysisofendovasculardrugelutingtreatmentsforfemoropoplitealarterydiseaseintheuk
AT garnerabigailm economicanalysisofendovasculardrugelutingtreatmentsforfemoropoplitealarterydiseaseintheuk
AT zayedhany economicanalysisofendovasculardrugelutingtreatmentsforfemoropoplitealarterydiseaseintheuk
AT clevelandtrevor economicanalysisofendovasculardrugelutingtreatmentsforfemoropoplitealarterydiseaseintheuk
AT pietzschjanb economicanalysisofendovasculardrugelutingtreatmentsforfemoropoplitealarterydiseaseintheuk