Differential drug response in pulmonary arterial hypertension: The potential for precision medicine.

Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is a rare, complex, and deadly cardiopulmonary disease. It is characterized by changes in endothelial cell function and smooth muscle cell proliferation in the pulmonary arteries, causing persistent vasoconstriction, resulting in right heart hypertrophy and failure. There are multiple drug classes specific to PAH treatment, but variation between patients may impact treatment response. A small subset of patients is responsive to pulmonary vasodilators and can be treated with calcium channel blockers, which would be deleterious if prescribed to a typical PAH patient. Little is known about the underlying cause of this important difference in vasoresponsive PAH patients. Sex, race/ethnicity, and pharmacogenomics may also factor into efficacy and safety of PAH-specific drugs. Research has indicated that endothelin receptor antagonists may be more effective in women and there have been some minor differences found in certain races and ethnicities, but these findings are muddled by the impact of socioeconomic factors and a lack of representation of non-White patients in clinical trials. Genetic variants in genes such as CYP3A5, CYP2C9, PTGIS, PTGIR, GNG2, CHST3, and CHST13 may influence the efficacy and safety of certain PAH-specific drugs. PAH research faces many challenges, but there is potential for new methodologies to glean new insights into PAH development and treatment.

Ex Ante Economic Evaluation of Arg389 Genetically Targeted Treatment with Bucindolol versus Empirical Treatment with Carvedilol in NYHA III/IV Heart Failure.

OBJECTIVE: The Beta-Blocker Evaluation Survival Trial showed no survival benefit for bucindolol in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction, but subanalyses suggested survival benefits for non-Black subjects and Arg389 homozygotes. We conducted an ex ante economic evaluation of Arg389 targeted treatment with bucindolol versus carvidolol, complementing a previous ex ante economic evaluation of bucindolol preceded by genetic testing for the Arg389 polymorphism, in which genetic testing prevailed economically over no testing. METHODS: A decision tree analysis with an 18-month time horizon was performed to estimate the cost effectiveness/cost utility of trajectories of 100%, 50%, and 0% of patients genetically tested for Arg389 and comparing bucindolol with empirical carvedilol treatment as per prior BEST subanalyses. Incremental cost-effectiveness/cost-utility ratios (ICERs/ICURs) were estimated. RESULTS: Race-based analyses for non-White subjects at 100% testing showed a loss of (0.04) life-years and (0.03) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at an incremental cost of $2185, yielding a negative ICER of ($54,625)/life-year and ICUR of ($72,833)/QALY lost; at 50%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.27) life-years and (0.16) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1843, yielding a negative ICER of ($6826)/life-year and ICUR of ($11,519)/QALY lost; at 0%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.33) life-years and (0.30) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1459, yielding a negative ICER of ($4421)/life-year and ICUR of ($4863)/QALY lost. Arg389 homozygote analyses at 100% testing showed incremental gains of 0.02 life-years and 0.02 QALYs at an incremental cost of $378, yielding an ICER of 18,900/life-year and ICUR of $18,900/QALY gained; at 50%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.24) life-years and (0.09) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1039, yielding a negative ICER of ($4329)/life-year and ICUR of ($9336)/QALY lost; at 0%, the analyses showed a loss of (0.33) life-years and (0.30) QALYs at an incremental cost of $1459, yielding a negative ICER of ($4421)/life-year and ICUR of ($4863)/QALY lost. CONCLUSION: This independent ex ante economic evaluation suggests that genetically targeted treatment with bucindolol is unlikely to yield clinicoeconomic benefits over empirical treatment with carvedilol in NYHA III/IV HF.

Cost-effectiveness of anticoagulants for suspected heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in the United States.

Despite the availability of multiple nonheparin anticoagulants for the treatment of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT), few data are available comparing the cost-effectiveness of these agents. This analysis is particularly important when considering differences in the risk of adverse effects, routes of administration, requirements for phlebotomy and laboratory monitoring, and overall drug costs. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of argatroban, bivalirudin, and fondaparinux for the treatment of suspected HIT from the institutional perspective. A 3-arm decision-tree model was developed that employs standard practices for anticoagulation monitoring. We incorporated published data on drug efficacy and probability of HIT-related thromboembolism and major bleeding. We considered both institutional costs and average wholesale price (AWP) and performed probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) to address any uncertainty in model parameters. Using institutional costs, fondaparinux prevailed over both argatroban and bivalirudin in terms of cost ($151 vs $1250 and $1466, respectively) and adverse events averted (0.9989 vs 0.9957 and 0.9947, respectively). Results were consistent when AWP was used, with fondaparinux being less expensive ($555 vs $3081 and $2187, respectively) and more effective in terms of adverse events averted (0.9989 vs 0.9957 and 0.9947, respectively). The PSA confirmed our findings using both institutional costs and AWP. In conclusion, fondaparinux subcutaneous injection afforded significant advantages in terms of cost savings and adverse events averted compared with IV argatroban or bivalirudin infusions. Our data strongly suggest potential cost savings with fondaparinux and underscore the critical need for larger clinical studies of fondaparinux in the treatment of suspected HIT.

Biobanks and electronic medical records: enabling cost-effective research.

The use of electronic medical record data linked to biological specimens in health care settings is expected to enable cost-effective and rapid genomic analyses. Here, we present a model that highlights potential advantages for genomic discovery and describe the operational infrastructure that facilitated multiple simultaneous discovery efforts.