Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Dose Compared to Standard-Dose Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Within-Trial Economic Evaluation of the ENCHANTED Study

1Citations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction: The Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED) showed that a low-dose alteplase was safe but not clearly non-inferior to standard-dose alteplase in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Given the significant cost of this medicine, we undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the probability that low-dose is cost-effective relative to standard-dose alteplase in China. Methods: For ENCHANTED participants in China with available health cost data, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were undertaken in which death or disability (modified Rankin scale scores 2-6) at 90 days and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were used as outcome measures, respectively. There was adherence to standard guidelines for health economic evaluations alongside non-inferiority trials and according to a health-care payer's perspective. The equivalence margin for cost and effectiveness was set at USD 691 and -0.025 QALYs, respectively, for the base-case analysis. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the probability of low-dose alteplase being non-inferior. Results: While the mean cost of alteplase was lower in the low-dose group (USD 1,569 vs. USD 2,154 in the standard-dose group), the total cost was USD 56 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1,000-1,113) higher compared to the standard-dose group due to higher hospitalization costs in the low-dose group. There were 462 (95% CI: 415-509) and 410 (95% CI: 363-457) patients with death or disability per 1,000 patients in the low-dose and standard-dose groups, respectively. The low-dose group had marginally lower (0.008, 95% CI: -0.016-0.001) QALYs compared to their standard-dose counterparts. The low-dose group was found to have an 88% probability of being non-inferior based on cost-effectiveness versus the standard-dose group. Conclusions: This health economic evaluation alongside the ENCHANTED indicates that the use of low-dose alteplase does not save overall healthcare costs nor lead to a gain in QALYs in the management of Chinese patients with AIS compared to the use of standard dose. There is little justification on economic grounds to shift from standard-of-care thrombolysis in AIS.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Si, L., Chen, X., Ouyang, M., Wang, X., Chen, G., Cao, Y. J., … Jan, S. (2023). Cost-Effectiveness of Low-Dose Compared to Standard-Dose Alteplase for Acute Ischemic Stroke in China: A Within-Trial Economic Evaluation of the ENCHANTED Study. Cerebrovascular Diseases, 52(2), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1159/000525869

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free