Cost-effectiveness analysis of dronedarone versus other anti-arrhythmic drugs for the treatment of atrial fibrillation—results for Canada, Italy, Sweden and Switzerland

The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care(2012)

引用 8|浏览2
暂无评分
摘要
The ATHENA clinical trial enrolled 4,628 patients in 37 countries and evaluated the efficacy of dronedarone 400 mg twice daily versus placebo for the prevention of cardiovascular hospitalisation or death from any cause in patients with paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter. The trial showed a statistically significant 24 % reduction in the primary endpoint cardiovascular hospitalisations or all-cause death. In the current paper, parameters that drive the cost-effectiveness of dronedarone on top of standard therapy versus likely comparators, i.e. amiodarone, sotalol and flecainide, were investigated by means of a health economic model based on the ATHENA clinical trial. Dronedarone is cost-effective, and ICERs are low versus amiodarone with €5,340; €4,620; €3,850 and €5,630 per QALY gained for Canada, Italy, Sweden and Switzerland, respectively. The most significant driving factor for the cost-effectiveness of dronedarone is the increased survival rate for patients on dronedarone.
更多
查看译文
关键词
cost effectiveness
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要