Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin plus a vitamin K antagonist for the treatment of venous thromboembolism

J Med Econ. 2014 Jan;17(1):52-64. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.858634. Epub 2013 Nov 14.

Abstract

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), comprised of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is commonly treated with a low-molecular-weight heparin such as enoxaparin plus a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) to prevent recurrence. Administration of enoxaparin + VKA is hampered by complexities of laboratory monitoring and frequent dose adjustments. Rivaroxaban, an orally administered anticoagulant, has been compared with enoxaparin + VKA in the EINSTEIN trials. The objective was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin + VKA as anticoagulation treatment for acute, symptomatic, objectively-confirmed DVT or PE.

Methods: A Markov model was built to evaluate the costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios associated with rivaroxaban compared to enoxaparin + VKA in adult patients treated for acute DVT or PE. All patients entered the model in the 'on-treatment' state upon commencement of oral rivaroxaban or enoxaparin + VKA for 3, 6, or 12 months. Transition probabilities were obtained from the EINSTEIN trials during treatment and published literature after treatment. A 3-month cycle length, US payer perspective ($2012), 5-year time horizon and a 3% annual discount rate were used.

Results: Treatment with rivaroxaban cost $2,448 per-patient less and was associated with 0.0058 more QALYs compared with enoxaparin + VKA, making it a dominant economic strategy. Upon one-way sensitivity analysis, the model's results were sensitive to the reduction in index VTE hospitalization length-of-stay associated with rivaroxaban compared with enoxaparin + VKA. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY, probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed rivaroxaban to be cost-effective compared with enoxaparin + VKA approximately 76% of the time.

Limitations: The model did not account for the benefits associated with an oral and minimally invasive administration of rivaroxaban. 'Real-world' applicability is limited because data from the EINSTEIN trials were used in the model. Also, resource utilization and costs were based on the US healthcare system.

Conclusion: Rivaroxaban is a cost-effective option for anticoagulation treatment of acute VTE patients.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Anticoagulants / economics*
  • Anticoagulants / therapeutic use
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Drug Therapy, Combination / economics
  • Enoxaparin / economics*
  • Enoxaparin / therapeutic use
  • Humans
  • Markov Chains
  • Middle Aged
  • Morpholines / economics*
  • Morpholines / therapeutic use
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Rivaroxaban
  • Thiophenes / economics*
  • Thiophenes / therapeutic use
  • United States / epidemiology
  • Venous Thrombosis / mortality
  • Venous Thrombosis / prevention & control*
  • Vitamin K / economics*
  • Vitamin K / therapeutic use

Substances

  • Anticoagulants
  • Enoxaparin
  • Morpholines
  • Thiophenes
  • Vitamin K
  • Rivaroxaban