We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Cost-Effectiveness of Alirocumab: A Just-in-Time Analysis Based on the ODYSSEY Outcomes Trial.
Annals of Internal Medicine 2019 Februrary 20
Background: The ODYSSEY Outcomes (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab) trial included participants with a recent acute coronary syndrome. Compared with participants receiving statins alone, those receiving a statin plus alirocumab had lower rates of a composite outcome including myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and death.
Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of alirocumab in these circumstances.
Design: Decision analysis using the Cardiovascular Disease Policy Model.
Data Sources: Data sources representative of the United States combined with data from the ODYSSEY Outcomes trial.
Target Population: U.S. adults with a recent first MI and a baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 1.81 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) or greater.
Time Horizon: Lifetime.
Perspective: U.S. health system.
Intervention: Alirocumab or ezetimibe added to statin therapy.
Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in 2018 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
Results of Base-Case Analysis: Compared with a statin alone, the addition of ezetimibe cost $81 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], $51 000 to $215 000) per QALY. Compared with a statin alone, the addition of alirocumab cost $308 000 (UI, $197 000 to $678 000) per QALY. Compared with the combination of statin and ezetimibe, replacing ezetimibe with alirocumab cost $997 000 (UI, $254 000 to dominated) per QALY.
Results of Sensitivity Analysis: The price of alirocumab would have to decrease from its original cost of $14 560 to $1974 annually to be cost-effective relative to ezetimibe.
Limitation: Effectiveness estimates were based on a single randomized trial with a median follow-up of 2.8 years and should not be extrapolated to patients with stable coronary heart disease.
Conclusion: The price of alirocumab would have to be reduced considerably to be cost-effective. Because substantial reductions already have occurred, we believe that timely, independent cost-effectiveness analyses can inform clinical and policy discussions of new drugs as they enter the market.
Primary Funding Source: University of California, San Francisco, and Institute for Clinical and Economic Review.
Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of alirocumab in these circumstances.
Design: Decision analysis using the Cardiovascular Disease Policy Model.
Data Sources: Data sources representative of the United States combined with data from the ODYSSEY Outcomes trial.
Target Population: U.S. adults with a recent first MI and a baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 1.81 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) or greater.
Time Horizon: Lifetime.
Perspective: U.S. health system.
Intervention: Alirocumab or ezetimibe added to statin therapy.
Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in 2018 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
Results of Base-Case Analysis: Compared with a statin alone, the addition of ezetimibe cost $81 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], $51 000 to $215 000) per QALY. Compared with a statin alone, the addition of alirocumab cost $308 000 (UI, $197 000 to $678 000) per QALY. Compared with the combination of statin and ezetimibe, replacing ezetimibe with alirocumab cost $997 000 (UI, $254 000 to dominated) per QALY.
Results of Sensitivity Analysis: The price of alirocumab would have to decrease from its original cost of $14 560 to $1974 annually to be cost-effective relative to ezetimibe.
Limitation: Effectiveness estimates were based on a single randomized trial with a median follow-up of 2.8 years and should not be extrapolated to patients with stable coronary heart disease.
Conclusion: The price of alirocumab would have to be reduced considerably to be cost-effective. Because substantial reductions already have occurred, we believe that timely, independent cost-effectiveness analyses can inform clinical and policy discussions of new drugs as they enter the market.
Primary Funding Source: University of California, San Francisco, and Institute for Clinical and Economic Review.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app