Cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel-aspirin versus aspirin alone for acute transient ischemic attack and minor stroke

Abstract

Background: Treatment with the combination of clopidogrel and aspirin taken soon after a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or minor stroke was shown to reduce the 90-day risk of stroke in a large trial in China, but the cost-effectiveness is unknown. This study sought to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the clopidogrel-aspirin regimen for acute TIA or minor stroke. Methods and Results: A Markov model was created to determine the cost-effectiveness of treatment of acute TIA or minor stroke patients with clopidogrel-aspirin compared with aspirin alone. Inputs for the model were obtained from clinical trial data, claims databases, and the published literature. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Oneway and multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the findings. Compared with aspirin alone, clopidogrel-aspirin resulted in a lifetime gain of 0.037 QALYs at an additional cost of CNY 1250 (US$ 192), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of CNY 33 800 (US$ 5200) per QALY gained. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that clopidogrel-aspirin therapy was more cost-effective in 95.7% of the simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold recommended by the World Health Organization of CNY 105 000 (US$ 16 200) per QALY. Conclusions: Early 90-day clopidogrel-aspirin regimen for acute TIA or minor stroke is highly cost-effective in China. Although clopidogrel is generic, Plavix is brand in China. If Plavix were generic, treatment with clopidogrel-aspirin would have been cost saving.