Cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan versus enalapril in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction

J Med Econ. 2018 Feb;21(2):174-181. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2017.1387119. Epub 2017 Oct 10.

Abstract

Background: Sacubitril/valsartan reduces cardiovascular death and hospitalizations for heart failure (HF). However, decision-makers need to determine whether its benefits are worth the additional costs, given the low-cost generic status of traditional standard of care.

Aims: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan compared to enalapril in patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction, from the Singapore healthcare payer perspective.

Methods: A Markov model was developed to project clinical and economic outcomes of sacubitril/valsartan vs enalapril for 66-year-old patients with HF over 10 years. Key health states included New York Heart Association classes I-IV and deaths; patients in each state incurred a monthly risk of hospitalization for HF and cardiovascular death. Sacubitril/valsartan benefits were modeled by applying the hazard ratios (HRs) in PARADIGM-HF trial to baseline probabilities. Primary model outcomes were total and incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for sacubitril/valsartan relative to enalapril Results: Compared to enalapril, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with an ICER of SGD 74,592 (USD 55,198) per QALY gained. A major driver of cost-effectiveness was the cardiovascular mortality benefit of sacubitril/valsartan. The uncertainty of this treatment benefit in the Asian sub-group was tested in sensitivity analyses using a HR of 1 as an upper limit, where the ICERs ranged from SGD 41,019 (USD 30,354) to SGD 1,447,103 (USD 1,070,856) per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed the probability of sacubitril/valsartan being cost-effective was below 1%, 12%, and 71% at SGD 20,000, SGD 50,000, and SGD 100,000 per QALY gained, respectively.

Conclusions: At the current daily price sacubitril/valsartan may not represent good value for limited healthcare dollars compared to enalapril in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in HF in the Singapore healthcare setting. This study highlights the cost-benefit trade-off that healthcare professionals and patients face when considering therapy.

Keywords: Asian; Heart failure; Singapore; cost-effectiveness; enalapril; sacubitril/valsartan.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Aminobutyrates / administration & dosage
  • Aminobutyrates / economics*
  • Biphenyl Compounds
  • Cohort Studies
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis*
  • Drug Combinations
  • Drug Costs
  • Drug Therapy, Combination / economics*
  • Enalapril / administration & dosage
  • Enalapril / economics*
  • Female
  • Heart Failure / diagnosis
  • Heart Failure / drug therapy*
  • Heart Failure / mortality
  • Hospitalization / economics
  • Hospitalization / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Markov Chains
  • Multivariate Analysis
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Severity of Illness Index
  • Singapore
  • Stroke Volume
  • Survival Analysis
  • Tetrazoles / administration & dosage
  • Tetrazoles / economics*
  • Valsartan / administration & dosage
  • Valsartan / economics*

Substances

  • Aminobutyrates
  • Biphenyl Compounds
  • Drug Combinations
  • Tetrazoles
  • Enalapril
  • Valsartan
  • sacubitril and valsartan sodium hydrate drug combination