Vericiguat versus sacubitril/valsartan for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in China: a cost-utility analysis.

Background: PARADIGM-HF and VICTORIA studies have shown that treatment with sacubitril/valsartan or vericiguat could reduce cardiovascular mortality and hospitalisation in the patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, the cost-utility analysis of adding sacubitril/valsartan or vericiguat to the standard treatment of heart failure in Chinese patients with HFrEF was still unclear.

Methods: Based on the Chinese healthcare system, a multi-state Markov model has been established for the cost-utility analysis and compared with the results of VICTORIA study subgroups and relevant local data in China. This model simulated the direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of HFrEF patients over a period of 20 years, in which these patients were treated with the standard treatment of heart failure and either adding sacubitril/valsartan or vericiguat. Moreover, incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) were also analysed and the robustness of the results was verified by using sensitivity analysis.

Results: In the base case study, according to the Chinese HFrEF patients, the total costs for the sacubitril/valsartan group and the vericiguat group were 4,237.42 USD and 4,618.59 USD, respectively, and the total utility was 3.62 and 3.48 QALYs, respectively. The ICUR was -2,611.68 USD/QALY, and the INMB was -5,772.32 USD. The sensitivity analysis indicated that the results were robust. The results of scenario analysis and base-case analysis were basically consistent.

Conclusions: On the standard treatment of heart failure, adding sacubitril/valsartan alone was more cost-effective than adding vericiguat alone for the treatment of HFrEF.