Back to Browse Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 5

Cost-effectiveness of dronedarone and standard of care compared with standard of care alone: US results of an ATHENA lifetime model

Authors Reynolds MR, Nilsson J, Åkerborg Ö, Jhaveri M, Lindgren P

Published Date January 2013 Volume 2013:5 Pages 19—28

DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S36019

Received 17 July 2012, Accepted 31 August 2012, Published 8 January 2013

Matthew R Reynolds,1 Jonas Nilsson,2 Örjan Åkerborg,2 Mehul Jhaveri,3 Peter Lindgren2,4

1
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA; 2OptumInsight, Stockholm, Sweden; 3sanofi-aventis Inc, Bridgewater, NJ, USA; 4Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

Background: The first antiarrhythmic drug to demonstrate a reduced rate of cardiovascular hospitalization in atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) patients was dronedarone in a placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel arm Trial to assess the efficacy of dronedarone 400 mg bid for the prevention of cardiovascular Hospitalization or death from any cause in patiENts with Atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter (ATHENA trial). The potential cost-effectiveness of dronedarone in this patient population has not been reported in a US context. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of dronedarone from a US health care payers’ perspective.
Methods and results: ATHENA patient data were applied to a patient-level health state transition model. Probabilities of health state transitions were derived from ATHENA and published data. Associated costs used in the model (2010 values) were obtained from published sources when trial data were not available. The base-case model assumed that patients were treated with dronedarone for the duration of ATHENA (mean 21 months) and were followed over a lifetime. Cost-effectiveness, from the payers' perspective, was determined using a Monte Carlo microsimulation (1 million fictitious patients). Dronedarone plus standard care provided 0.13 life years gained (LYG), and 0.11 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), over standard care alone; cost/QALY was $19,520 and cost/LYG was $16,930. Compared to lower risk patients, patients at higher risk of stroke (Congestive heart failure, history of Hypertension, Age ≥ 75 years, Diabetes mellitus, and past history of Stroke or transient ischemic attack (CHADS2) scores 3–6 versus 0) had a lower cost/QALY ($9580–$16,000 versus $26,450). Cost/QALY was highest in scenarios assuming lifetime dronedarone therapy, no cardiovascular mortality benefit, no cost associated with AF/AFL recurrence on standard care, and when discounting of 5% was compared with 0%.
Conclusions: By extrapolating the results of a large, multicenter, randomized clinical trial (ATHENA), this model suggests that dronedarone is a cost-effective treatment option for approved indications (paroxysmal/persistent AF/AFL) in the US.

Keywords: cost-effectiveness, dronedarone, ATHENA

Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML] 

Creative Commons License This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. Permissions beyond the scope of the License are administered by Dove Medical Press Limited. Information on how to request permission may be found at: http://www.dovepress.com/permissions.php

Readers of this article also read:

Glycemic control and diabetes-related health care costs in type 2 diabetes; retrospective analysis based on clinical and administrative databases

Degli Esposti L, Saragoni S, Buda S, Sturani A, Degli Esposti E

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2013, 5:193-201

Published Date: 14 May 2013

Cost-effectiveness evaluation of escitalopram in major depressive disorder in Italy

Mencacci C, Di Sciascio G, Katz P, Ripellino C

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2013, 5:87-99

Published Date: 7 February 2013

Cost and appropriateness of treating asthma with fixed-combination drugs in local health care units in Italy

Ruggeri I, Bragato D, Colombo GL, Valla E, Di Matteo S

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2012, 4:375-382

Published Date: 5 December 2012

Cost-effectiveness of candesartan versus losartan in the primary preventive treatment of hypertension

Granström O, Levin LA, Henriksson M

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2012, 4:313-322

Published Date: 1 November 2012

Cost-effectiveness study of oral hypoglycemic agents in the treatment of outpatients with type 2 diabetes attending a public primary care clinic in Mexico City

Díaz de León-Castañeda C, Altagracia-Martínez M, Kravzov-Jinich J, Cárdenas-Elizalde MR, Moreno-Bonett C, Martínez-Núñez JM

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2012, 4:57-65

Published Date: 7 March 2012

The role of galenic innovation in improving treatment compliance and persistence: three case studies

Zoellner Y, Balp MM, Gili Marco A

ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research 2011, 3:109-116

Published Date: 4 August 2011

Role of aliskiren in cardio-renal protection and use in hypertensives with multiple risk factors

Eduardo Pimenta, Suzanne Oparil

Vascular Health and Risk Management 2009, 5:453-463

Published Date: 19 May 2009