Abstract
Background: To date, there have been few economic evaluations, from a Canadian perspective, of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with acute unprovoked VTE. As a result, there is a lack of consensus about which treatment strategy should be adopted in the clinical setting.
Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness of currently approved anti coagulant options, in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, for the prevention of recurrent VTE in patients with unprovoked events managed on an outpatient basis.
Methods: Microsoft Excel was used to develop a Markov model. Model parameters were determined using published literature, local hospital data, expert opinion, and chart review. The analysis considered the costs associated with pharmaceuticals, laboratory testing, hematologist fees, and treatment of recurrent VTE and major bleeding events. Effectiveness was measured in terms of QALYs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.
Results: For treatment lasting 3 months, apixaban represented the most cost-effective DOAC relative to low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) + vitamin K antagonist, with an ICER of $7379.66. For 6 months of treatment, apixaban again represented the most cost-effective treatment, with an ICER of $84.08 per QALY gained, and this drug dominated all the other strategies at 12 months. For lifetime treatment, DOACs were unlikely to be cost-effective, given a maximum willingness to pay of $50 000 to $100 000 per QALY. In a probabilistic sensitivity analysis at 6 months, 46.4% of iterations resulted in apixaban having lower costs and better outcomes than LMWH + vitamin K antagonist, and 78.6% of iterations resulted in an ICER below $100 000
Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that apixaban is likely cost-effective for treatment durations of 3, 6, and 12 months. However, for indefinite treatment, DOACs were unlikely to be cost-effective.