4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Cost-effectiveness of Mechanical Thrombectomy More Than 6 Hours After Symptom Onset Among Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke

      research-article
      , MSc 1 , , , PhD 2 , , MD, MPH 3 , , PhD 1 , 4 , , PhD 1 , 4
      JAMA Network Open
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          Is mechanical thrombectomy in the extended treatment window cost-effective across patient subgroups in the United States?

          Findings

          This economic evaluation study found that mechanical thrombectomy provides good value for money in all the defined subgroups the 2 randomized clinical trials evaluated. Sensitivity analyses revealed a wide range of probabilities for late mechanical thrombectomy to be cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per quality-adjusted life-year.

          Meaning

          The results of this study suggest that attention should be placed on increasing access to mechanical thrombectomy rather than on developing subgroup-specific guidelines unless workforce and budget constraints require prioritization.

          Abstract

          This economic evaluation study compares the cost-effectiveness of 2 strategies (mechanical thrombectomy with standard medical care vs standard medical care alone) for various subgroups of patients with acute ischemic stroke who were receiving care more than 6 hours after symptom onset.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Two 2018 randomized controlled trials (DAWN and DEFUSE 3) demonstrated the clinical benefit of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) more than 6 hours after onset in acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Health-economic evidence is needed to determine whether the short-term health benefits of late MT translate to a cost-effective option during a lifetime in the United States.

          Objective

          To compare the cost-effectiveness of 2 strategies (MT added to standard medical care [SMC] vs SMC alone) for various subgroups of patients with AIS receiving care more than 6 hours after symptom onset.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This economic evaluation study used the results of the DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials to populate a cost-effectiveness model from a US health care perspective combining a decision tree and Markov trace. The DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials enrolled 206 international patients from 2014 to 2017 and 182 US patients from 2016 to 2017, respectively. Patients were followed until 3 months after stroke. The clinical outcome at 3 months was available for 29 subgroups of patients with AIS and anterior circulation large vessel occlusions. Data analysis was conducted from July 2018 to October 2019.

          Exposures

          MT with SMC in the extended treatment window vs SMC alone.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) during lifetime were estimated. Deterministic results (incremental costs and effectiveness, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and net monetary benefit) were presented, and probabilistic analyses were performed for the total populations and 27 patient subgroups.

          Results

          In the DAWN study, the MT group had a mean (SD) age of 69.4 (14.1) years and 42 of 107 (39.3%) were men, and the control group had a mean (SD) age of 70.7 (13.2) years and 51 of 99 (51.5%) were men. In the DEFUSE 3 study, the MT group had a median (interquartile range) age of 70 (59-79) years, and 46 of 92 (50.0%) were men, and the control group had a median (interquartile range) age of 71 (59-80) years, and 44 of 90 (48.9%) were men. For the total trial population, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were $662/QALY and $13 877/QALY based on the DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials, respectively. MT with SMC beyond 6 hours had a probability greater than 99.9% of being cost-effective vs SMC alone at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALY. Subgroup analyses showed a wide range of probabilities for MT with SMC to be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000/QALY, with the greatest uncertainty observed for patients with a National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score of at least 16 and for those aged 80 years or older.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          The results of this study suggest that late MT added to SMC is cost-effective in all subgroups evaluated in the DAWN and DEFUSE 3 trials, with most results being robust in probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Future MT evidence-gathering could focus on older patients and those with National Institute of Health Stroke Scale scores of 16 and greater.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Modeling good research practices--overview: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1.

          Models-mathematical frameworks that facilitate estimation of the consequences of health care decisions-have become essential tools for health technology assessment. Evolution of the methods since the first ISPOR modeling task force reported in 2003 has led to a new task force, jointly convened with the Society for Medical Decision Making, and this series of seven papers presents the updated recommendations for best practices in conceptualizing models; implementing state-transition approaches, discrete event simulations, or dynamic transmission models; dealing with uncertainty; and validating and reporting models transparently. This overview introduces the work of the task force, provides all the recommendations, and discusses some quandaries that require further elucidation. The audience for these papers includes those who build models, stakeholders who utilize their results, and, indeed, anyone concerned with the use of models to support decision making.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            ACC/AHA statement on cost/value methodology in clinical practice guidelines and performance measures: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures and Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cost-Effectiveness of Solitaire Stent Retriever Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke

              Clinical trials have demonstrated improved 90-day outcomes for patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with stent retriever thrombectomy plus tissue-type plasminogen activator (SST+tPA) compared with tPA. Previous studies suggested that this strategy may be cost-effective, but models were derived from pooled data and older assumptions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                25 August 2020
                August 2020
                25 August 2020
                : 3
                : 8
                : e2012476
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
                [2 ]Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
                [3 ]Department of Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut
                [4 ]Institute for Medical Technology Assessment, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: May 14, 2020.
                Published: August 25, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12476
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Peultier A-C et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Anne-Claire Peultier, MSc, Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Bayle Building, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, 3062 PA Rotterdam, the Netherlands ( peultier@ 123456eshpm.eur.nl ).
                Author Contributions: Ms Peultier had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Drs Severens and Redekop shared final authorship.
                Concept and design: Peultier, Severens, Redekop.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Peultier, Pandya, Sharma.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Peultier, Pandya, Redekop.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Peultier, Pandya.
                Obtained funding: Severens.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Peultier, Redekop.
                Supervision: Peultier, Severens, Redekop.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
                Funding/Support: The project leading to this publication has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No. 668142.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Additional Contributions: We gratefully acknowledge James Burke, MD (University of Michigan), for his valuable inputs related to this work. We gratefully acknowledge Loic Boussel, PhD, and Philippe Douek, PhD (University Claude Bernard Lyon 1), for proposing the original idea of this article and supporting the related work.
                Article
                zoi200471
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12476
                7448828
                32840620
                fe737031-4f39-4a98-b4a9-1c33065b1746
                Copyright 2020 Peultier A-C et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 23 November 2019
                : 14 May 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Neurology

                Comments

                Comment on this article