Cost-Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation Versus Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation: The CABANA Randomized Clinical Trial

Author:

Chew Derek S.12ORCID,Li Yanhong1,Cowper Patricia A.1,Anstrom Kevin J.134,Piccini Jonathan P.15ORCID,Poole Jeanne E.6ORCID,Daniels Melanie R.1,Monahan Kristi H.7ORCID,Davidson-Ray Linda1,Bahnson Tristram D.15ORCID,Al-Khalidi Hussein R.13ORCID,Lee Kerry L.13,Packer Douglas L.7ORCID,Mark Daniel B.15ORCID,

Affiliation:

1. Duke Clinical Research Institute (D.S.C., Y.L., P.A.C., K.J.A., J.P.P., M.R.D., L.D.-R., T.D.B., H.R.A.-K., K.L.L., D.B.M.), Duke University, Durham, NC.

2. Department of Cardiac Sciences, Libin Cardiovascular Institute, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada (D.S.C.).

3. Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics (K.J.A., H.R.A.-K., K.L.L.), Duke University, Durham, NC.

4. Gillings School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC (K.J.A.).

5. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (J.P.P., T.D.B., D.B.M.).

6. University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle (J.E.P.).

7. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN (D.L.P., K.H.M.).

Abstract

Background: In the CABANA trial (Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation), catheter ablation did not significantly reduce the primary end point of death, disabling stroke, serious bleeding, or cardiac arrest compared with drug therapy by intention-to-treat, but did improve the quality of life and freedom from atrial fibrillation recurrence. In the heart failure subgroup, ablation improved both survival and quality of life. Cost-effectiveness was a prespecified CABANA secondary end point. Methods: Medical resource use data were collected for all CABANA patients (N=2204). Costs for hospital-based care were assigned using prospectively collected bills from US patients (n=1171); physician and medication costs were assigned using the Medicare Fee Schedule and National Average Drug Acquisition Costs, respectively. Extrapolated life expectancies were estimated using age-based survival models. Quality-of-life adjustments were based on EQ-5D–based utilities measured during the trial. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, comparing ablation with drug therapy on the basis of intention-to-treat, and assessed from the US health care sector perspective. Results: Costs in the first 3 months averaged $20 794±SD 1069 higher with ablation compared with drug therapy. The cumulative within-trial 5-year cost difference was $19 245 (95% CI, $11 360–$27 170) and the lifetime mean cost difference was $15 516 (95% CI, –$2963 to $35,512) higher with ablation than with drug therapy. The drug therapy arm accrued an average of 12.5 life-years (LYs) and 10.7 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). For the ablation arm, the corresponding estimates were 12.6 LYs and 11.0 QALYs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $57 893 per QALY gained, with 75% of bootstrap replications yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio < $100 000 per QALY gained. With no quality-of-life/utility adjustments, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $183 318 per LY gained. Conclusions: Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation was economically attractive compared with drug therapy in the CABANA Trial overall at present benchmarks for health care value in the United States on the basis of projected incremental QALYs but not LYs alone.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Physiology (medical),Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3