Strategies to reduce out-of-pocket medication costs for Canadians with peripheral arterial disease.

BACKGROUND: Given that peripheral arterial disease (PAD) disproportionately affects people of lower socioeconomic status, out-of-pocket expenses for preventive medications are a major barrier to their use. We carried out a cost comparison of drug therapies for PAD to identify prescribing strategies that minimize out-of-pocket expenses for these medications. METHODS: Between March and June 2019, we contacted outpatient pharmacies in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, to assess pricing of pharmacologic therapies at dosages included in the 2016 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline for management of lower extremity PAD. We also gathered pricing information for supplementary charges, including delivery, pill splitting and blister packaging. We calculated prescription prices with and without dispensing fees for 30-day brand-name and generic prescriptions, and 90-day generic prescriptions. RESULTS: Twenty-four pharmacies, including hospital-based, independent and chain, were included in our sample. In the most extreme scenario, total 90-day medication costs could differ by up to $1377.26. Costs were affected by choice of agent within a drug class, generic versus brand-name drug, quantity dispensed, dispensing fee and delivery cost, if any. CONCLUSION: By opting for prescriptions for 90 days or as long as possible, selecting the lowest-cost generic drugs available in each drug class, and identifying dispensing locations with lower fees, prescribers can minimize out-of-pocket patient medication expenses. This may help improve adherence to guideline-recommended therapies for the secondary prevention of vascular events in patients with PAD.

Investigating the impact of suboptimal prescription of preoperative antiplatelets and statins on race and ethnicity-related disparities in major limb amputation.

BACKGROUND: Non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic patients with symptomatic PAD may receive different treatments than White patients with symptomatic PAD. The delivery of guideline-directed medical treatment may be a modifiable upstream driver of race and ethnicity-related disparities in outcomes such as limb amputation. The purpose of our study was to investigate the prescription of preoperative antiplatelets and statins in producing disparities in the risk of amputation following revascularization for symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD). METHODS: We used data from the Vascular Quality Initiative, a vascular procedure-based registry in the United States (2011-2018). We estimated the probability of preoperative antiplatelet and statin prescriptions and 1-year incidence of amputation. We then estimated the amputation risk difference between race/ethnicity groups that could be eliminated under a hypothetical intervention. RESULTS: Across 100,579 revascularizations, the 1-year amputation risk was 2.5% (2.4%, 2.6%) in White patients, 5.3% (4.9%, 5.6%) in Black patients, and 5.3% (4.7%, 5.9%) in Hispanic patients. Black (57.5%) and Hispanic patients (58.7%) were only slightly less likely than White patients (60.9%) to receive antiplatelet and statin therapy. However, the effect of antiplatelets and statins was greater in Black and Hispanic patients such that, had all patients received these medications, the estimated risk difference comparing Black to White patients would have reduced by 8.9% (-2.9%, 21.9%) and the risk difference comparing Hispanic to White patients would have been reduced by 17.6% (-0.7%, 38.6%). CONCLUSION: Even though guideline-directed care appeared evenly distributed by race/ethnicity, increasing access to such care may decrease health care disparities in major limb amputation.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Compared with Aspirin Alone in the COMPASS Trial: A US Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily with aspirin 100 mg daily was shown to be better than aspirin 100 mg daily for preventing cardiovascular (CV) death, stroke or myocardial infarction in patients with either stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD). The cost-effectiveness of this regimen in this population is essential for decision-makers to know. METHODS: US direct healthcare system costs (in USD) were applied to hospitalized events, procedures and study drugs utilized by all patients. We determined the mean cost per participant for the full duration of the trial (mean follow-up of 23 months) plus quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a lifetime using a two-state Markov model with 1-year cycle length. Sensitivity analyses were performed on the price of rivaroxaban and the annual discontinuation rate. RESULTS: The costs of events and procedures were reduced for Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) patients who received rivaroxaban 2.5 mg orally (BID) plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) compared with ASA alone. Total costs were higher for the combination group ($7426 versus $4173) after considering acquisition costs of the study drug. Over a lifetime, patients receiving rivaroxaban plus ASA incurred $27,255 more and gained 1.17 QALYs compared with those receiving ASA alone resulting in an ICER of $23,295/QALY. ICERs for PAD only and polyvascular disease subgroups were lower. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID plus ASA compared with ASA alone was cost-effective (high value) in the USA. COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01776424.

Mortality, Outcomes, Costs, and Use of Medicines Following a First Heart Failure Hospitalization: EVOLUTION HF.

BACKGROUND: There are few contemporary data on outcomes, costs, and treatment following a hospitalization for heart failure (hHF) in epidemiologically representative cohorts. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe rehospitalizations, hospitalization costs, use of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) (renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, sacubitril/valsartan, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors), and mortality after hHF. METHODS: EVOLUTION HF (Utilization of Dapagliflozin and Other Guideline Directed Medical Therapies in Heart Failure Patients: A Multinational Observational Study Based on Secondary Data) is an observational, longitudinal cohort study using data from electronic health records or claims data sources in Japan, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Adults with a first hHF discharge between 2018 and 2022 were included. The 1-year event rates per 100 patient-years (ERs) for death and rehospitalizations (with a primary diagnosis of heart failure (HF), chronic kidney disease [CKD], myocardial infarction, stroke, or peripheral artery disease) were calculated. Hospital health care costs were cumulatively summarized. Cumulative GDMT use was assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: Of 263,525 patients, 28% died within the first year post-hHF (ER: 28.4 [95% CI: 27.0-29.9]). Rehospitalizations were mainly driven by HF (ER: 13.6 [95% CI: 9.8-17.4]) and CKD (ER: 4.5 [95% CI: 3.6-5.3]), whereas the ERs for myocardial infarction, stroke, and peripheral artery disease were lower. Health care costs were predominantly driven by HF and CKD. Between 2020 and 2022, use of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, sacubitril/valsartan, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists changed little, whereas uptake of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors increased 2- to 7-fold. CONCLUSIONS: Incident post-hHF rehospitalization risks and costs were high, and GDMT use changed little in the year following discharge, highlighting the need to consider earlier and greater implementation of GDMT to manage risks and reduce costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for peripheral artery disease in patients with coronary artery disease in China: A Markov model.

BACKGROUND: The innovative pharmacological combination of low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin provides clinicians with an ideal opportunity to intensify the medical treatment of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and comorbid peripheral artery disease (PAD). We aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of PAD screening using the ankle-brachial index (ABI) test in patients with CAD (with rivaroxaban administered if the PAD screening was positive) compared with no-screening strategy in China. METHODS: A Markov decision model using a 1-month cycle was developed to simulate the 25-year effectiveness and cost of PAD screening on 75-year-old patients with CAD in China, evaluating the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way, two-way, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of variations in the key parameters for ICERs. RESULTS: Our model found an incremental cost of RMB4,959 (US$740) and an incremental QALY of 0.054 after one-time ABI screening, leading to an ICER of RMB91,936 (US$13,717) per QALY gained over a 25-year period. The reduction in all-cause mortality related to rivaroxaban and its cost were the factors most affecting the ICER. The screening would become cost-effective by decreasing the monthly cost of rivaroxaban to RMB184.5 (US$27.5) or by using domestic-brand rivaroxaban according to the threshold of a willingness to pay RMB72,447 (US$10,809) per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that ABI screening for PAD to decide on low-dose rivaroxaban administration was not cost-effective for patients with CAD in China. Nevertheless, policy-guided cost changes for domestic-brand rivaroxaban could easily resolve this issue.

The cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban with or without aspirin in the COMPASS trial.

AIMS: The Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial demonstrated that rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID with aspirin 100 mg was more effective than aspirin 100 mg daily alone for the prevention of cardiovascular (CV) death, stroke, or myocardial infarction in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD). We aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban using patient-level data from the COMPASS trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed an in-trial analysis and extrapolated our results for 33 years using a two-state Markov model with a 1-year cycle length. Hospitalization events, procedures, and study drugs were documented for patients. We applied country-specific (Canada, France, and Germany) direct healthcare system costs (in USD) to healthcare resources consumed by patients. Average cost per patient during the trial (mean follow-up of 23 months), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and lifetime cost-effectiveness were calculated. Costs of events and procedures were reduced with rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID with aspirin. The addition of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg BID increased total costs for the combination group. Over a lifetime horizon (in trial +33 years), rivaroxaban plus aspirin was associated with 1.17 QALYs gained, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $3946/QALY, $9962/QALY, and $10 264/QALY in Canada, France, and Germany, respectively. PAD and polyvascular disease subgroups had lower ICERs. CONCLUSION: Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin compared with aspirin alone reduces direct healthcare costs. After acquisition costs of rivaroxaban, the lifetime cost-effectiveness of 2.5 mg twice daily plus aspirin is highly cost-effective in Canada, France, and Germany.(COMPASS ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01776424).

Cost-effectiveness of a paclitaxel-eluting stent (Eluvia) compared to Zilver PTX for endovascular femoropopliteal intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Antiproliferative therapies based on paclitaxel have been developed to extend the durability of endovascular interventions for lower-extremity atherosclerotic peripheral artery disease, resulting in improved primary vessel patency and fewer target lesion revascularizations. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the sustained-release, paclitaxel-eluting Eluvia stent (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) versus the paclitaxel-coated Zilver PTX stent (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) for endovascular intervention in the superficial femoral or proximal popliteal artery. DESIGN: A microsimulation model was constructed from a United States Medicare perspective with a 24-month time horizon. Patients entering the model were assigned to initial endovascular intervention with either Eluvia or Zilver PTX. Each month patients were exposed to the risks of primary vessel patency loss, target lesion revascularization, amputation, and death. Clinical input parameters were taken from a randomized trial (IMPERIAL) comparing the two interventions at 24-months follow-up. Cost parameters were obtained from analyses of Medicare administrative and claims data. Cost-effectiveness analysis entailed sampling a complete set of clinical and cost parameters from their respective distributions, and then running cohorts of 10,000 patients through each intervention arm of the model. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the base case microsimulation, at 24 months, the modeled target lesion revascularization was 11.6% for Eluvia and 19.0% for Zilver PTX, and the mean total direct costs were $20,010 and $21,356, respectively (Eluvia average savings=$1,346). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, Eluvia was cost-effective in 87.8% of all simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $10,000 per target lesion revascularization prevented. Eluvia was more effective and less costly (dominant) than Zilver PTX in 73.6% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparison of a paclitaxel-eluting to a paclitaxel-coated stent for endovascular femoropopliteal intervention, Eluvia was more effective and less costly (dominant) than Zilver PTX from a US Medicare perspective. These findings should be considered when formulating reimbursement policy and clinical practice guidelines.

Paclitaxel is a drug used in the treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) to help maintain primary vessel patency and reduce the need for revascularization procedures. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the paclitaxel-eluting Eluvia stent (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) versus the paclitaxel-coated Zilver PTX stent (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) in Medicare patients with PAD. Cost-effectiveness is defined as the degree to which a particular treatment option is effective relative to its costs. Therefore, this study compared both the effectiveness, in terms of target lesion revascularization rates, and the costs of Eluvia versus Zilver PTX over 24 months.A microsimulation model was developed from a United States Medicare perspective with a 24-month time horizon. Simulated patients entered the model and were assigned to receive either Eluvia or Zilver PTX. Monthly, patients were exposed to the risks of primary vessel patency loss, target lesion revascularization (TLR), amputation, and death. These risks were taken from a randomized controlled trial that compared Eluvia and Zilver PTX over 24 months. Patients also accrued costs over time. The costs used in the model were obtained from Medicare administrative and claims data analyses.In health economics, a treatment is considered to be the dominant treatment option if it is both more effective and less costly than the alternative treatment. In this case, Eluvia was found to be dominant over Zilver PTX because it was associated with lower TLR rates and lower costs. These findings should be considered when formulating reimbursement policy and clinical practice guidelines.

Clinical implications and cost-effectiveness analysis of rivaroxaban in patients with coronary artery disease or peripheral arterial disease in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at substantial risk of atherothrombotic events. The COMPASS trial showed that patients with stable CAD or PAD experienced significant benefits after treatment with rivaroxaban in combination with acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) compared with ASA alone. This paper aims to provide insight into the clinical and economic consequences of treatment with rivaroxaban from a Dutch societal perspective. METHODS: The clinical and economic implications of rivaroxaban in terms of the number of events prevented, costs, the incremental cost per life-years gained (LYG), and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were determined based on a cost-effectiveness model for patients with stable CAD or PAD and in high-risk subgroups (i.e. patients with CAD and PAD, CAD and prior myocardial infarction and renal impairment, CAD and heart failure) using results from the Cardiovascular OutcoMes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial. RESULTS: Patients treated with rivaroxaban have an expected increased discounted life expectancy of 0.67 years. In high-risk groups discounted incremental life expectancy ranged from 1.33 to 1.90 years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the full COMPASS population was €9,760/LYG and €12,033/QALY, whereas, for high-risk subgroups of patients with underlying conditions, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from €2,966/LYG to €5,052/LYG and from €3,940/QALY to €6,815/QALY. Results from the sensitivity analyses revealed that the model results were robust to variations in single or multiple input parameters at once. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that rivaroxaban in combination with ASA is a cost-effective treatment option in stable CAD or PAD patients. Rivaroxaban in combination with ASA is even more cost-effective in high-risk subgroups.

Trends in Use of Cardioprotective Medication in Peripheral Artery Disease: A Nationwide Study.

Background Guideline-based cardioprotective medical therapy is intended to reduce the burden of adverse cardiovascular and limb outcomes in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). However, contemporary data describing trends in use of medication remains limited. The present study, therefore, aims to investigate changes in use of cardioprotective medication in PAD. Methods and Results By using Danish national healthcare registries, we identified all patients with first-time diagnosis of PAD (1997-2016) and classified them into two groups: (1) PAD+ that includes all patients with PAD with a history of cardiovascular disease, ie, myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, and stroke (n=162 627); and (2) PAD (n=87 935) that comprise patients without a history of cardiovascular disease. We determined the use of medication in the first 12 months after the incident diagnosis of PAD and estimated age standardized 1-year mortality rates. Our results showed increase in use of cardioprotective medication throughout the study period in both groups. However, PAD+ had a higher use of medication (acetylsalicylic acid, 3.5%-48.4%; Clopidogrel, 0%-17.6%; vitamin K antagonists, 0.9%-7.8%; new oral anticoagulants, 0.0%-10.1%; Statins, 1.9%-58.1%; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, 1.2%-20.6%), compared with PAD (acetylsalicylic acid, 2.9%-54.4%; Clopidogrel, 0%-11.9%; vitamin K antagonists, 0.9%-2.4%; new oral anticoagulants, 0.0%-3.4%; Statins, 1.5%-56.9%; angiotensin-converting enzyme, 0.9%-17.2%), respectively. Furthermore, 1-year mortality rates in PAD declined with increased use of medications during study. Conclusions In this nationwide study, use of cardioprotective medication increased considerably with time, but compared to patients with other atherosclerotic diseases, there remains an underuse of guideline-based medical therapy in patients with PAD.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ankle-brachial index screening in patients with coronary artery disease to optimize medical management.

INTRODUCTION: Screening for peripheral artery disease (PAD) with the ankle-brachial index (ABI) test is currently not recommended in the general population; however, previous studies advocate screening in high-risk populations. Although providers may be hesitant to prescribe low-dose rivaroxaban to patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) alone, given the reduction in cardiovascular events and death associated with rivaroxaban, screening for PAD with the ABI test and accordingly prescribing rivaroxaban may provide additional benefits. We sought to describe the cost-effectiveness of screening for PAD in patients with CAD to optimize this high-risk populations' medical management. METHODS: We used a Markov model to evaluate the ABI test in patients with CAD. We assumed that all patients screened would be candidates for low-dose rivaroxaban. We assessed the cost of ABI screening at $100 per patient and added additional charges for physician visits ($100) and rivaroxaban cost ($470 per month). We used a 30-day cycle and performed analysis over 35 years. We evaluated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from previous studies and determined the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) according to our model. We performed a deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses of variables with uncertainty and reported them in a Tornado diagram showing the variables with the greatest effect on the ICER. RESULTS: Our model estimates decision costs to screen or not screen at $94,953 and $82,553, respectively. The QALYs gained from screening was 0.060, generating an ICER of $207,491 per QALY. Factors most influential on the ICER were the reduction in all-cause mortality associated with rivaroxaban and the prohibitively high cost of rivaroxaban. If rivaroxaban cost less than $95 per month, this would make screening cost-effective based on a willingness to pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: According to our model, screening patients with CAD for PAD to start low-dose rivaroxaban is not currently cost-effective due to insufficient reduction in all-cause mortality and high medication costs. Nevertheless, vascular surgeons have a unique opportunity to prescribe or advocate for low-dose rivaroxaban in patients with PAD to improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Compared with Aspirin Alone in Patients with Coronary and Peripheral Artery Diseases in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is a selective inhibitor of coagulation factor Xa and its combination with aspirin showed better outcomes in the prevention of recurrent cardiovascular disease than aspirin alone. OBJECTIVE: This analysis aimed to economically compare the cost effectiveness of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) plus aspirin (100 mg once daily) with aspirin alone in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) and related subgroups. METHODS: The analysis simulates the perspective of the Italian National Healthcare Service and used a state-transition decision Markov model. Clinical efficacy data and health events risks were gathered from the COMPASS trial. Health outcomes and costs (in Euros) were evaluated over a lifetime horizon and were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Direct healthcare costs entered the analysis. Results were expressed in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. One-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: For the CAD or PAD population, rivaroxaban plus aspirin was more effective and costly compared with aspirin alone. Incremental costs and efficacy produced an ICER of €16,522 per QALY gained. Analyses found similar trends for the PAD and CAD groups, with respective ICERs of €8003 and €18,599, while ICERs for the other groups were lower than €13,000 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. CONCLUSION: Compared with aspirin alone, rivaroxaban plus aspirin is cost effective in preventing recurrent cardiovascular events in all patients with CAD or PAD, from the Italian perspective. These results could help clinicians and decision makers to develop improved strategies for cardiovascular disease prevention.

Efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban plus aspirin in women and men with chronic coronary or peripheral artery disease.

AIMS: The COMPASS trial demonstrated that the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily and aspirin 100 mg once daily compared with aspirin 100 mg once daily reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease by 24% during a mean follow-up of 23 months. We explored whether this effect varies by sex. METHODS AND RESULTS: The effects were examined in women and men using log-rank tests and Kaplan-Meier curve. Hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained from stratified Cox proportional hazards models to explore subgroup effects including subgroup of women and men according to baseline modified REACH risk score. Of 27 395 patients randomized, 18 278 were allocated to receive rivaroxaban plus aspirin (n = 9152) or aspirin alone (n = 9126), and of these, 22.1% were women. Women compared with men had similar incidence rates for MACE and major bleeding but borderline lower rates for myocardial infarction (1.7% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.05). The effect of combination therapy compared with aspirin in women and men was consistent for MACE (women: 3.8% vs. 5.2%, HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.97; men: 4.2% vs. 5.5%, HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66-0.89; P interaction 0.75) and major bleeding (women: 3.1% vs. 1.4%, HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.42-3.46; men: 3.2% vs. 2.0%, HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.29-1.97; P interaction 0.19). There was no significant interaction between randomized treatment and baseline modified REACH score above or below the median for MACE or major bleeding. CONCLUSION: In patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease, the combination of rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily) and aspirin compared with aspirin alone appears to produce consistent benefits in women and men, independent of baseline cardiovascular risk.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of rivaroxaban plus aspirin versus aspirin alone in secondary prevention among patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin versus aspirin alone for patients with stable cardiovascular diseases in the Taiwan setting. METHODS: We constructed a Markov model to project the lifetime direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years of both therapies. Transitional probabilities were derived from the COMPASS trial, and the costs and utilities were obtained from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Database and published studies. One-way, scenario, subgroup, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was presented as the outcome. The threshold of willingness-to-pay was set at US$76,368 (3 times the gross domestic product per capita of Taiwan). All analyses were operated by TreeAge 2019 and Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of rivaroxaban plus aspirin versus aspirin alone in the patients with stable cardiovascular diseases, coronary artery diseases, and peripheral artery diseases were US$83,459, US$69,852 and -US$13,823 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. The probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that the probabilities of cost-effectiveness for the regimen with rivaroxaban among those with cardiovascular diseases and coronary artery diseases were 44.1% and 65.3% at US$76,368. CONCLUSION: Low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin is less likely to be a cost-effective alternative to aspirin in secondary prevention for the patients with stable cardiovascular diseases; however, among these patients, the regimen may have pharmacoeconomic incentives for the group merely having chronic coronary artery diseases from the Taiwan national payer's perspective. The pharmacoeconomic incentives are influenced by the drug price, event treatment fees, and willingness-to-pay threshold.

Fast-track thrombolysis protocol for acute limb ischemia.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter-directed thrombolysis in the treatment of acute lower extremity arterial occlusions often requires several interventional sessions to generate successful outcomes. It is typically an expensive procedure, necessitating extended hospital length of stay (LOS) that may be associated with an increase in both local and systemic hemorrhagic complications. Five years ago, we created the fast-track thrombolysis protocol for arteries (FTTP-A) to deal with these concerns. The goal of our protocol is to re-establish patency during the first session of thrombolysis, thus decreasing costs and complications associated with prolonged periods of thrombolytic exposure. METHODS: A retrospective study of 42 patients who were treated for acute limb ischemia at our institution by FTTP-A from January 2014 to February 2019 was performed. FTTP-A includes periadventitial lidocaine injection at the arterial puncture site under ultrasound guidance, contrast arteriography of the entire targeted segment, pharmacomechanical rheolytic thrombectomy of the occluded arterial segment, tissue plasminogen activator infusion along the occluded segment, balloon maceration of the thrombus, and (if deemed necessary) placement of a stent in an area of significant (≥30%) stenosis that is refractory to balloon angioplasty and thrombolysis. After the stenosis or thrombus is cleared, patients are prescribed an oral anticoagulant agent. RESULTS: Primary FTTP-A (50 total interventions) was performed in 42 patients. The median age of patients was 67.2 ± 12.2 years (range, 41-98 years), and 54.8% were male; 59.5% of the procedures were performed on the left lower extremity. Initial arterial access was obtained through the common femoral artery in 39 of 42 cases (92.9%); in the remaining 3 cases, it was obtained in a left bypass access site, a right femoral-popliteal graft, and a right femoral-femoral graft. The mean operative time was 148.9 ± 62.9 minutes (range, 83-313 minutes), and the mean volume of tissue plasminogen activator infused was 9.7 ± 4.0 mg (range, 2-20 mg). The median cost including medications and interventional tools was $4673.19 per procedure. The mean postoperative LOS was 3.1 ± 4.5 days (range, 1-25 days). Median postoperative LOS was 1 day. Mean postoperative follow-up was 27 ± 19.2 months (range, 0-62 months). Single-session FTTP-A was successful in 81% (n = 34/42) of patients; the remaining 8 patients (19%) required a single additional session. Of the 42 patients, 34 (81%) required arterial stenting. Periprocedural complications consisted of one patient with hematuria, which resolved, and one patient with thrombocytopenia, which resolved. No patients experienced rethrombosis within 30 days of FTTP-A. During the 5-year study period, there was no significant local or systemic hemorrhage, limb loss, or mortality related to this protocol. CONCLUSIONS: FTTP-A appears to be a safe, efficacious, and cost-effective procedure in the resolution of acute lower extremity arterial occlusions.

Assessment of Trends in Statin Therapy for Secondary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in US Adults From 2007 to 2016.

Importance: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is highly prevalent in the US, with studies indicating substantial rates of nonadherence to and undertreatment with statin therapy. The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline recommended high-intensity statins for all patients age 75 years and younger with documented ASCVD in whom such therapy is tolerated, but there is limited evidence documenting population trends of statin use, adherence, and outcomes in the periods before and after the update to the guideline. Objective: To assess trends in the use, adherence, cost, and outcomes of statin therapy for secondary prevention in patients with different types of ASCVD between 2007 and 2016. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from the OptumLab Data Warehouse database containing privately insured and Medicare Advantage enrollees with demographic characteristics similar to the national US population. Participants were adult patients (age ≥21 years) who had their first ASCVD event between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2016. Data were characterized as belonging to 3 groups: (1) cardiovascular heart disease (CHD); (2) ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA); and (3) peripheral artery disease (PAD). Data were analyzed from July 1 to August 1, 2018. Exposures: Calendar year of the initial ASCVD event. Main Outcomes and Measures: Trends in the statin use (within 30 days of discharge from hospitalization), adherence (proportion of days covered ≥80% within the first year), cost, major adverse cardiac events (1-year cumulative risk), and statin intolerance (within the first year). Results: Of the 284 954 patients with a new ASCVD event, 128 422 (45.1%) were women; the median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 54-72 years); 207 781 (72.9%) were White. The use of statins increased from 50.3% in 2007 to 59.9% in 2016, the use of high-intensity statins increased from 25.0% to 49.2%, and the adherence increased from 58.7% to 70.5% (P < .001 for all trends). Patients with CHD were more likely to receive statins and high-intensity statins and adhere to medications than patients with ischemic stroke, TIA, or PAD despite similar observed treatment benefit. In 2016, 80.9% of patients with CHD used a statin vs 65.8% of patients with ischemic stroke or TIA and 37.5% of patients with PAD. Out-of-pocket cost per 30-day decreased from a median of $20 (interquartile range, $7.6-$31.9) in 2007 to $2 (interquartile range, $1.6-$10.0) in 2016 (P < .001) with the increasing use of generic statins (42.0% in 2007 vs 94.9% in 2016; P < .001). Major adverse cardiac events decreased from 8.9% in 2007 to 6.5% in 2016 (P < .001) whereas statin intolerance increased from 4.0% to 5.1% (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: There have been modest improvements in the use, adherence, and cardiovascular outcomes over the past decade for statin therapy in patients with ASCVD, but a substantial and persistent treatment gap exists between patients with and without CHD, between men and women.

Editor's Choice - Optimal Pharmacological Treatment of Symptomatic Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease and Evidence of Female Patient Disadvantage: An Analysis of Health Insurance Claims Data.

OBJECTIVE: Optimal pharmacological treatment (OPT) for peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD) includes prescription of lipid lowering drugs, antithrombotics, and antihypertensives to symptomatic patients affected by intermittent claudication or chronic limb threatening ischaemia. This study sought to determine sex disparities and time trends in prescription of OPT in this population (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03909022). METHODS: Using data from the second largest insurance fund in Germany, BARMER, data on patients with an index admission for symptomatic PAOD between 1 January 2010 and 30 June 2018 with follow up until the end of 2018 were analysed. Sex disparities in post-discharge prescription status six months after index admission were tested and adjusted for patient and healthcare variables using bivariable tests and logistic regression analysis. Time trends in the prescription prevalence of OPT were analysed and tested. RESULTS: There were 83 867 patients (mean age 71.9 years and 45.8% women) eligible for inclusion in the study. When compared with men, women had lower rates of prior outpatient care for PAOD (39.8% vs. 47.0%), were admitted more often with ischaemic rest pain (13.9% vs. 10.4%) and were older (74 vs. 70 y). After discharge, women had a lower rate of prescriptions for lipid lowering drugs (52.4% vs. 59.9%), while they received antihypertensive drugs more often (86.7% vs. 84.1%). We found evidence for a lower prescription prevalence of OPT in females (37.0% vs. 42.7%). Differences in patient and healthcare variables (e.g. demographics, comorbidities, prior treatment) between women and men explained 56% of this gap. The sex prescription gap did not narrow over time despite an overall upward trend in prescription prevalence for both women and men. CONCLUSION: Although presenting older and with more severe symptoms at the index admission for PAOD, women have a lower prescription prevalence of OPT compared with men, particularly with respect to lipid lowering drugs.

Missed Opportunities for Timely Recognition of Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia in Patients Undergoing a Major Amputation: A Population Based Cohort Study Using the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

OBJECTIVE: Opportunities for timely recognition of chronic limb-threatening ischaemia (CLTI) within primary care, such as performing cardiovascular assessment during clinical consultation, are possibly being missed. This study aimed to investigate for potential "missed opportunities" within primary care. METHODS: This was a population based cohort study, using the UK's Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Patients undergoing a major amputation for CLTI between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2016 were included. Primary care consultation and patient clinical data within the one year period prior to amputation were extracted from the CPRD. Dates of last primary care consultation and cardiovascular assessment prior to amputation were evaluated. Timings of latest cardiovascular assessments were stratified into "recent" (7-90 days before amputation) and "late" (> 91 days). RESULTS: In total, 3 260 patients were included. In the year prior to amputation, patients attended a median of 19 (range 9-32) primary care consultations; however, prescription of secondary preventive medications was poor (antiplatelet 49.7%; lipid lowering agent 40.7%). Overall, 2 175 patients (66.7%) attended a primary care consultation 7-30 days before their amputation. However, only 416 (12.8%) underwent a cardiovascular assessment within this period, with 2 073 (63.6%) undergoing no assessment within 90 days of their amputation. Of these 2 073 patients, 1 230 (59.3%) had a primary care consultation 7-30 days before their procedure. Patients undergoing "late" assessment were younger (p = .003), with higher systolic (p = .008) and diastolic (p = .001) blood pressures than those undergoing "recent" assessment. Differences were also observed between assessment timings by deprivation (p = .003) and ethnicity (p = .006). CONCLUSION: Missed opportunities for timely recognition potentially exist and may be related to age, deprivation, and ethnicity. Further work is required to investigate these factors, as well as individual amputations to identify the causes precipitating amputation. Greater emphasis on the medical management of peripheral arterial disease and identifying cardiovascular risk factors in patients who may not fit the "at risk" stereotype, are also required.

Cost-Effectiveness of Coronary and Peripheral Artery Disease Antithrombotic Treatments in Finland.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, 15-20% of individuals with coronary artery disease (chronic coronary syndrome [CCS]) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) receiving routine treatment experience cardiovascular events (CVEs) within 3-4 years. Using PICOSTEPS (Patients-Intervention-Comparators-Outcomes-Setting-Time-Effects-Perspective-Sensitivity analysis) reporting, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of recently approved rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily in combination with acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg daily (RIV + ASA) for the prevention of CVEs among Finns with CCS or symptomatic PAD. METHODS: Myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, acute limb ischemia, amputations, major extracranial bleeding, venous thromboembolism, and cardiovascular deaths were modeled in a Markov model examining a cohort of patients with CCS or symptomatic PAD. Relative effects of the intervention (RIV + ASA) and comparator (ASA) were based on the COMPASS trial. The primary outcome was 3%/year discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), defined as cost (2019 euros) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in the Finnish setting over a lifetime horizon. In addition to nonfatal and fatal CVEs, the effects factored Finnish non-CVE mortality, quality of life, and direct costs from a public payer perspective. Disaggregated costs and QALYs, costs per life year gained (LYG), and ischemic strokes avoided, net monetary benefit (NMB), expected value of perfect information (EVPI), economic value-added (EVA), cost-effectiveness table, and acceptability frontier were examined. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: In the deterministic comparison with ASA over a lifetime horizon, RIV + ASA resulted in a benefit of 0.404 QALYs and 0.474 LYGs for an additional cost of €3241, resulting in an ICER of €8031/QALY. The probabilistic ICER was €4313/QALY (EVPI €1829/patient). RIV + ASA had positive NMB (€8791/patient), low EVPI (€88/patient), high EVA (€8703/patient), and 91% probability of cost-effectiveness using the willingness-to-pay of €25,254/QALY. The primary result was conservative and robust for RIV + ASA. CONCLUSION: RIV + ASA was a cost-effective treatment alternative compared with ASA in patients with CCS or symptomatic PAD in Finland.

Finland lacks published evidence on the cost-effectiveness of approved interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular events among individuals with chronic coronary syndrome (stable coronary artery disease) or symptomatic peripheral artery disease at risk of cardiovascular complications. Rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg once daily is indicated and reimbursed in Finland for the prevention of cardiovascular events for patients with stable coronary artery disease or symptomatic peripheral artery disease. We assessed the effectiveness and costs of treatment with rivaroxaban plus acetylsalicylic acid in comparison with treatment with acetylsalicylic acid. That is, we examined whether rivaroxaban is cost-effective when prescribed in combination with acetylsalicylic acid.Cardiovascular events with their associated costs and impact on quality of life were modeled over the lifetime of patients. The main effectiveness outcome was quality-adjusted life years (modeled survival multiplied by the expected quality of life), and costs included those relevant to the Finnish public payer in 2019. Extensive sensitivity analyses were carried out to evaluate the impacts of different model inputs and rationale.Rivaroxaban plus acetylsalicylic acid had high probability of being cost-effective, compared with acetylsalicylic acid. By valuing quality-of-life benefit with a plausible willingness-to-pay, net cost savings of €8791 per patient could be gained or economic value added by €8703 per patient if rivaroxaban was used.

Effects of statin and antiplatelet therapy noncompliance and intolerance on patient outcomes following vascular surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Prior studies have evaluated the effects of statin and antiplatelet agent (APA) medications on patients with peripheral arterial disease. Although the benefits of statin and APA use are well-described, there is a paucity of research into the specific outcomes of patients who are not compliant or those who are unable to take the medication owing to intolerance. Here we examine the outcomes of patients intolerant to statin and APA and compare them with patients who are compliant or noncompliant with these therapies. METHODS: Patients treated from 2005 to 2018 in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry were included. Patients with missing data or deaths within 30 days of procedure were removed. Patients were considered noncompliant if they were previously prescribed a medication at discharge but were not taking it at 1-year follow-up or if the patient was reported to be noncompliant in the registry. Medication intolerance was defined if listed as "no, for medical reasons," and mortality data were ascertained using the Social Security Death Index, which is regularly cross-referenced to the Vascular Quality Initiative registry. RESULTS: We identified 105,628 patients who met our inclusion criteria. Statin intolerance was noted in 2.3% at discharge and 2.1% at the 1-year follow-up, with 0.7% listed as intolerant at all stages. Factors associated with increased risk of intolerance to statins included female gender (P = .001), discharge APA intolerance (P = .004), insurance status (non-U.S. insurance) (P < .001), discharge APA noncompliance (P = .019), and discharge angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor noncompliance (P = .005). Patients who were compliant with statins showed a 91% survival at 5 years vs 87% survival in noncompliant patients and 87% in intolerant patients at 5 years (P < .001). Patients with statin intolerance have a similar survival curve as noncompliant patients across all registry cohorts. Noncompliance with statins was correlated with noncompliance with APA medications (R = 0.16, P < .001). Factors associated with increased risk of statin noncompliance included preoperative ambulatory status (requiring assistance) (P = .039), female sex (P < .001), peripheral vascular intervention (P < .001) or infrainguinal open bypass procedure surgery (P = .001), discharge status (to nursing home) (P = .006) and insurance (self-pay) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients not taking statin and APA medications have a substantially decreased 5-year survival irrespective of the reason for not taking. Importantly, patients noted to be intolerant have a similar survival curve as noncompliant patients across all registry cohorts. Intolerant patients may benefit from attempts to alter statin dose, type (hydrophilic vs lipophilic), or from newer agents such as PCSK9 inhibitors.