Abstract
Background
The RESCUE BT2 trial recently showcased the efficacy of tirofiban in treating acute ischemic stroke (AIS) without large or medium-sized vessel occlusion. To further assess the value of tirofiban from the perspectives of Chinese and US healthcare system, a study was conducted to evaluate its cost-effectiveness.
Methods
A hybrid model, integrating a short-term decision tree with a long-term Markov model, was developed to assess cost-effectiveness between tirofiban and aspirin for stroke patients without large or medium-sized vessel occlusion. Efficacy data for tirofiban was sourced from the RESCUE BT2 trial, while cost information was derived from published papers. Outcomes measured included respective cost, effectiveness, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). We conducted a one-way sensitivity analysis to assess the robustness of the results. Additionally, we performed probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) through 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations to evaluate the uncertainties associated with the results.
Results
The study revealed that tirofiban treatment in AIS patients without large or medium-sized vessel occlusion led to a considerable reduction of 2141 Chinese Yuan (CNY) in total cost, along with a lifetime gain of 0.14 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). In the US settings, tirofiban also exhibited a lower cost ($197,055 versus $201,984) and higher effectiveness (4.15 QALYs versus 4.06 QALYs) compared to aspirin. One-way sensitivity analysis revealed that post-stroke care costs and stroke utility had the greatest impact on ICER fluctuation in both Chinese and US settings. However, these variations did not exceed the willingness-to-pay threshold. PSA demonstrated tirofiban’s superior acceptability over aspirin in over 95% of potential scenarios.
Conclusion
Tirofiban treatment for AIS without large or medium-sized vessel occlusion appeared dominant compared to aspirin in both China and the US.
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Reference43 articles.
1. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke and its risk factors, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019;Lancet Neurol,2021
2. Global Epidemiology of Stroke and Access to Acute Ischemic Stroke Interventions;V Saini;Neurology,2021
3. Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990–2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study;GA Roth;J Am Coll Cardiol,2020
4. China Stroke Statistics: an update on the 2019 report from the National Center for Healthcare Quality Management in Neurological Diseases, China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases, the Chinese Stroke Association, National Center for Chronic and Non-communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Global Neuroscience and Stroke Collaborations;YJ Wang;Stroke and vascular neurology,2022
5. Cost-effectiveness of recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator for acute ischaemic stroke with unknown time of onset: a Markov modelling analysis from the Chinese and US perspectives;S Zhao;BMJ Open,2022