Cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment versus best medical management in basilar artery occlusion stroke: A U.S. healthcare perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Two recent studies showed clinical benefit for endovascular treatment (EVT) in basilar artery occlusion (BAO) stroke up to 12 h (ATTENTION) and between 6 and 24 h from onset (BAOCHE). Our aim was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of EVT from a U.S. healthcare perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical input data were available for both trials, which were analyzed separately. A decision model was built consisting of a short-run model to analyze costs and functional outcomes within 90 days after the index stroke and a long-run Markov state transition model (cycle length of 12 months) to estimate expected lifetime costs and outcomes from a healthcare and a societal perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated, deterministic (DSA) and probabilistic (PSA) sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: EVT in addition to best medical management (BMM) resulted in additional lifetime costs of $32,063 in the ATTENTION trial and lifetime cost savings of $7690 in the BAOCHE trial (societal perspective). From a healthcare perspective, EVT led to incremental costs and effectiveness of $37,389 and 2.0 QALYs (ATTENTION) as well as $3516 and 1.9 QALYs (BAOCHE), compared to BMM alone. The ICER values were $-4052/QALY (BAOCHE) and $15,867/QALY (ATTENTION) from a societal perspective. In each trial, PSA showed EVT to be cost-effective in most calculations (99.9%) for a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Cost of EVT and age at stroke represented the greatest impact on the ICER. DISCUSSION: From an economic standpoint with a lifetime horizon, EVT in addition to BMM is estimated to be highly effective and cost-effective in BAO stroke.

Health economic impact of Nerinetide in addition to mechanical thrombectomy without concurrent alteplase.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The ESCAPE-NA1 trial has shown that intravenous Nerinetide improves clinical outcomes in acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusion undergoing endovascular treatment without concurrent intravenous alteplase. We assessed the health economic impact of intravenous Nerinetide as an adjunctive treatment in endovascular treatment patients who do not receive concurrent intravenous alteplase. METHODS: Data are from the ESCAPE-NA1 trial, in which acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion endovascular treatment patients were randomized to receive intravenous Nerinetide or placebo. Only those patients not treated with concurrent intravenous alteplase were included in this analysis. We used a Markov state transition model (12 months cycle length) to estimate expected lifetime costs and outcomes, assuming Nerinetide cost being zero for the purpose of this analysis. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and derived mean net monetary benefits with 95% prediction intervals from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Upper, middle, and lower willingness-to-pay thresholds were set at $50,000,$100,000, and $150,000. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for Nerinetide in addition to endovascular treatment was $13,721/quality-adjusted life year (healthcare perspective) and $14,453/quality-adjusted life year (societal perspective). At the upper willingness-to-pay threshold, Nerinetide in addition to endovascular treatment resulted in a higher mean net monetary benefit compared to endovascular treatment alone, both from a healthcare perspective (449,526 [95% prediction interval: 448,627-450,425] vs. 382,584 [381,781-383,386]) and a societal perspective (350,750 [349,842-351,658] vs. 282,896 [282,068-283,725]). Mean net monetary benefits were also higher for Nerinetide in addition to endovascular treatment at the middle and lower willingness-to-pay thresholds. CONCLUSION: Treating patients with a cerebroprotectant, such as Nerinetide, in addition to endovascular treatmentl in patients who cannot receive intravenous alteplase may be beneficial from a health-economic standpoint.

Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Treatment in Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke With Mild Prestroke Disability: Results From the HERMES Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: The clinical and economic benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) in addition to best medical management in patients with stroke with mild preexisting symptoms/disability is not well studied. We aimed to investigate cost-effectiveness of EVT in patients with large vessel occlusion and mild prestroke symptoms/disability, defined as a modified Rankin Scale score of 1 or 2. METHODS: Data are from the HERMES collaboration (Highly Effective Reperfusion Evaluated in Multiple Endovascular Stroke Trials), which pooled patient-level data from 7 large, randomized EVT trials. We used a decision model consisting of a short-run model to analyze costs and functional outcomes within 90 days after the index stroke and a long-run Markov state transition model (cycle length of 12 months) to estimate expected lifetime costs and outcomes from a health care and a societal perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefits were calculated, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: EVT in addition to best medical management resulted in lifetime cost savings of $2821 (health care perspective) or $5378 (societal perspective) and an increment of 1.27 quality-adjusted life years compared with best medical management alone, indicating dominance of additional EVT as a treatment strategy. The net monetary benefits were higher for EVT in addition to best medical management compared with best medical management alone both at the higher (100 000$/quality-adjusted life years) and lower (50 000$/quality-adjusted life years) willingness to pay thresholds. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed decreased costs and an increase in quality-adjusted life years for additional EVT compared with best medical management only. CONCLUSIONS: From a health-economic standpoint, EVT in addition to best medical management should be the preferred strategy in patients with acute ischemic stroke with large vessel occlusion and mild prestroke symptoms/disability.

Variability assessment of manual segmentations of ischemic lesion volume on 24-h non-contrast CT.

PURPOSE: Infarct lesion volume (ILV) may serve as an imaging biomarker for clinical outcomes in the early post-treatment stage in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of manual segmentation of ILV on follow-up non-contrast CT (NCCT) scans. METHODS: Fifty patients from the Prove-IT study were randomly selected for this analysis. Three raters manually segmented ILV on 24-h NCCT scans, slice by slice, three times. The reference standard for ILV was generated by the Simultaneous Truth And Performance Level estimation (STAPLE) algorithm. Intra- and inter-rater reliability was evaluated, using metrics of intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) regarding lesion volume and the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). RESULTS: Median age of the 50 subjects included was 74.5 years (interquartile range [IQR] 67-80), 54% were women, median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 18 (IQR 11-22), median baseline ASPECTS was 9 (IQR 6-10). The mean reference standard ILV was 92.5 ml (standard deviation (SD) ± 100.9 ml). The manually segmented ILV ranged from 88.2 ± 91.5 to 135.5 ± 119.9 ml (means referring to the variation between readers, SD within readers). Inter-rater ICC was 0.83 (95%CI: 0.76-0.88); intra-rater ICC ranged from 0.85 (95%CI: 0.72-0.92) to 0.95 (95%CI: 0.91-0.97). The mean DSC among the three readers ranged from 65.5 ± 22.9 to 76.4 ± 17.1% and the mean overall DSC was 72.8 ± 23.0%. CONCLUSION: Manual ILV measurements on follow-up CT scans are reliable to measure the radiological outcome despite some variability.

Assessment of Discrepancies Between Follow-up Infarct Volume and 90-Day Outcomes Among Patients With Ischemic Stroke Who Received Endovascular Therapy.

Importance: Some patients have poor outcomes despite small infarcts after endovascular therapy (EVT), while others with large infarcts do well. Understanding why these discrepancies occur may help to optimize EVT outcomes. Objective: To validate exploratory findings from the Endovascular Treatment for Small Core and Anterior Circulation Proximal Occlusion with Emphasis on Minimizing CT to Recanalization Times (ESCAPE) trial regarding pretreatment, treatment-related, and posttreatment factors associated with discrepancies between follow-up infarct volume (FIV) and 90-day functional outcome. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study is a post hoc analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Nerinetide in Subjects Undergoing Endovascular Thrombectomy for Stroke (ESCAPE-NA1) trial, a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, international, multicenter trial conducted from March 2017 to August 2019. Patients who participated in ESCAPE-NA1 and had available 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores and 24-hour to 48-hour posttreatment follow-up parenchymal imaging were included. Exposures: Small FIV (volume ≤25th percentile) and large FIV (volume ≥75th percentile) on 24-hour computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging. Baseline factors, outcomes, treatments, and poststroke serious adverse events (SAEs) were compared between discrepant cases (ie, patients with 90-day mRS score ≥3 despite small FIV or those with mRS scores ≤2 despite large FIV) and nondiscrepant cases. Main Outcomes and Measures: Area under the curve (AUC) and goodness of fit of prespecified logistic models, including pretreatment (eg, age, cancer, vascular risk factors) and treatment-related and posttreatment (eg, SAEs) factors, were compared with stepwise regression-derived models for ability to identify small FIV with higher mRS score and large FIV with lower mRS score. Results: Among 1091 patients (median [IQR] age, 70.8 [60.8-79.8] years; 549 [49.7%] women; median [IQR] FIV, 24.9 mL [6.6-92.2 mL]), 42 of 287 patients (14.6%) with FIV of 7 mL or less (ie, ≤25th percentile) had an mRS score of at least 3; 65 of 275 patients (23.6%) with FIV of 92 mL or greater (ie, ≥75th percentile) had an mRS score of 2 or less. Prespecified models of pretreatment factors (ie, age, cancer, vascular risk factors) associated with low FIV and higher mRS score performed similarly to models selected by stepwise regression (AUC, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95] vs 0.93 [95% CI, 0.90-0.95]; P = .42). SAEs, specifically infarct in new territory, recurrent stroke, pneumonia, and congestive heart failure, were associated with low FIV and higher mRS scores; stepwise models also identified 24-hour hemoglobin as treatment-related/posttreatment factor (AUC, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.90-0.95] vs 0.94 [95% CI, 0.91-0.96]; P = .14). Younger age was associated with high FIV and lower mRS score; stepwise models identified absence of diabetes and higher baseline hemoglobin as additional pretreatment factors (AUC, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.70-0.82] vs 0.77 [95% CI, 0.71-0.83]; P = .82). Absence of SAEs, especially stroke progression, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage, and pneumonia, was associated with high FIV and lower mRS score2; stepwise models also identified 24-hour hemoglobin level, glucose, and diastolic blood pressure as posttreatment factors associated with discrepant cases (AUC, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.74-0.87] vs 0.79 [95% CI, 0.72-0.86]; P = .92). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, discrepancies between functional outcome and post-EVT infarct volume were associated with differences in pretreatment factors, such as age and comorbidities, and posttreatment complications related to index stroke evolution, secondary prevention, and quality of stroke unit care. Besides preventing such complications, optimization of blood pressure, glucose levels, and hemoglobin levels are potentially modifiable factors meriting further study.

Prehospital Triage of Acute Stroke Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has broad implications on stroke patient triage. Emergency medical services providers have to ensure timely transfer of patients while minimizing the risk of infectious exposure for themselves, their co-workers, and other patients. This statement paper provides a conceptual framework for acute stroke patient triage and transfer during the COVID-19 pandemic and similar healthcare emergencies in the future.