Economic impact associated with dronedarone use in patients with atrial fibrillation.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Zenobia Dotiwala, Julian Casciano, Gary Lebovics, Ron Preblick
{"title":"Economic impact associated with dronedarone use in patients with atrial fibrillation.","authors":"Zenobia Dotiwala, Julian Casciano, Gary Lebovics, Ron Preblick","doi":"10.1080/13696998.2025.2459499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objective/AimIn 2009, dronedarone was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration based on results from the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785), which showed significant reduction of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization and death in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) randomized to dronedarone versus placebo. In 2020, a retrospective study by Goehring et al. showed CV hospitalizations and deaths were lower in clinical practice following initiation of dronedarone compared to other antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with AF and atrial flutter. However, the economic impact associated with dronedarone use has not been fully assessed. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost associated with CV outcomes reported by Goehring et al. (2020).MethodsNational average Medicare payments in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) database (www.data.CMS.gov) were used to assign cost estimates to CV outcomes evaluated in Goehring et al. (2020) by diagnosis-related grouping. When costs were unavailable in the CMS database, a literature search was performed to identify publications reporting hospitalization costs.ResultsThe weighted average cost for CV hospitalization was calculated to be $20,508. When multiplied by the event rate reported in Goehring et al. (2020), cost per person year for CV hospitalization was 14% lower with dronedarone versus other AADs ($3,679 vs $4,272, respectively). For hospitalizations due to heart failure, cost was 31% lower with dronedarone compared with other AADs ($324 vs $472, respectively).LimitationsCosts have been calculated based on national averages reported by CMS (Medicare perspective) and are estimates. Regional differences may be present.ConclusionsPatients with AF taking dronedarone had lower costs associated with CV hospitalization compared with patients taking other AADs.</p>","PeriodicalId":16229,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Economics","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2025.2459499","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective/AimIn 2009, dronedarone was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration based on results from the ATHENA trial (NCT00174785), which showed significant reduction of cardiovascular (CV) hospitalization and death in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) randomized to dronedarone versus placebo. In 2020, a retrospective study by Goehring et al. showed CV hospitalizations and deaths were lower in clinical practice following initiation of dronedarone compared to other antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with AF and atrial flutter. However, the economic impact associated with dronedarone use has not been fully assessed. The objective of this study was to estimate the cost associated with CV outcomes reported by Goehring et al. (2020).MethodsNational average Medicare payments in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) database (www.data.CMS.gov) were used to assign cost estimates to CV outcomes evaluated in Goehring et al. (2020) by diagnosis-related grouping. When costs were unavailable in the CMS database, a literature search was performed to identify publications reporting hospitalization costs.ResultsThe weighted average cost for CV hospitalization was calculated to be $20,508. When multiplied by the event rate reported in Goehring et al. (2020), cost per person year for CV hospitalization was 14% lower with dronedarone versus other AADs ($3,679 vs $4,272, respectively). For hospitalizations due to heart failure, cost was 31% lower with dronedarone compared with other AADs ($324 vs $472, respectively).LimitationsCosts have been calculated based on national averages reported by CMS (Medicare perspective) and are estimates. Regional differences may be present.ConclusionsPatients with AF taking dronedarone had lower costs associated with CV hospitalization compared with patients taking other AADs.

心房颤动患者使用决奈达隆对经济的影响。
目标/目的 2009 年,美国食品和药物管理局根据 ATHENA 试验(NCT00174785)的结果批准了决奈达隆,该试验显示,随机接受决奈达隆治疗的心房颤动(房颤)患者的心血管住院和死亡人数显著减少,而安慰剂的治疗效果则不佳。2020 年,Goehring 等人进行的一项回顾性研究显示,在临床实践中,与其他抗心律失常药物(AADs)相比,房颤和房扑患者开始使用决奈达隆之后,心血管疾病住院和死亡的发生率更低。然而,与使用决奈达隆相关的经济影响尚未得到充分评估。本研究的目的是估算 Goehring 等人(2020 年)报告的 CV 结果的相关成本。方法使用美国医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)数据库(www.data.CMS.gov)中的全国平均医疗保险支付额,按诊断相关分组对 Goehring 等人(2020 年)评估的 CV 结果进行成本估算。如果 CMS 数据库中没有成本数据,则进行文献检索以确定报告住院成本的出版物。结果计算得出,CV 住院的加权平均成本为 20,508 美元。如果乘以 Goehring 等人(2020 年)报告的事件发生率,则使用决奈达隆与使用其他 AAD 相比,每人每年的心血管疾病住院费用要低 14%(分别为 3,679 美元对 4,272 美元)。在因心力衰竭住院方面,使用决奈达隆的成本比使用其他 AADs 低 31%(分别为 324 美元对 472 美元)。结论与服用其他 AADs 的患者相比,服用决奈达隆的房颤患者与冠心病住院相关的费用较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Economics
Journal of Medical Economics HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
122
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Economics'' mission is to provide ethical, unbiased and rapid publication of quality content that is validated by rigorous peer review. The aim of Journal of Medical Economics is to serve the information needs of the pharmacoeconomics and healthcare research community, to help translate research advances into patient care and be a leader in transparency/disclosure by facilitating a collaborative and honest approach to publication. Journal of Medical Economics publishes high-quality economic assessments of novel therapeutic and device interventions for an international audience
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信