Dapagliflozin vs non-SGLT-2i treatment is associated with lower healthcare costs in type 2 diabetes patients similar to participants in the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial: A nationwide observational study.

AIMS: To investigate how the cardiovascular (CV) risk benefits of dapagliflozin translate into healthcare costs compared with other non-sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs) in a real-world population with type 2 diabetes (T2D) that is similar to the population of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial. METHODS: Patients initiating dapagliflozin or oGLDs between 2013 and 2016 in Swedish nationwide healthcare registries were included if they fulfilled inclusion and exclusion criteria of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial (DECLARE-like population). Propensity scores for the likelihood of dapagliflozin initiation were calculated, followed by 1:3 matching with initiators of oGLDs. Per-patient cumulative costs for hospital healthcare (in- and outpatient) and for drugs were calculated from new initiation until end of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 24 828 patients initiated a new GLD; 6207 initiated dapagliflozin and 18 621 initiated an oGLD. After matching based on 96 clinical and healthcare cost variables, groups were balanced at baseline. Mean cumulative 30-month healthcare cost per patient was similar in the dapagliflozin and oGLD groups ($11 807 and $11 906, respectively; difference, -$99; 95% CI, -$629, $483; P = 0.644). Initiation of dapagliflozin rather than an oGLD was associated with significantly lower hospital costs (-$658; 95% CI, -$1169, -$108; P = 0.024) and significantly higher drug costs ($559; 95% CI, $471, $648; P < 0.001). Hospital cost difference was related mainly to fewer CV- and T2D-associated complications with use of dapagliflozin compared with use of an oGLD (-$363; 95% CI, -$665, -$61; P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: In a nationwide, real-world, DECLARE-like population, dapagliflozin was associated with lower hospital costs compared with an oGLD, mainly as a result of reduced rates of CV- and T2D-associated complications.

Cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor plus aspirin versus aspirin in acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack: an economic evaluation of the THALES trial.

Objective: THALES demonstrated that ticagrelor plus aspirin reduced the risk of stroke or death but increased bleeding versus aspirin during the 30 days following a mild-to-moderate acute non-cardioembolic ischaemic stroke (AIS) or high-risk transient ischaemic attack (TIA). There are no cost-effectiveness analyses supporting this combination in Europe. To address this, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. Methods: Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using a decision tree and Markov model with a short-term and long-term (30-year) horizon. Stroke, mortality, bleeding and EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) data from THALES were used to estimate short-term outcomes. Model transitions were based on stroke severity (disabling stroke was defined as modified Rankin Scale >2). Healthcare resource utilisation and EQ-5D data beyond 30 days were based on SOCRATES, another trial in AIS/TIA that compared ticagrelor with aspirin. Long-term costs, survival and disutilities were based on published literature. Unit costs were derived from national databases and discounted at 3% annually from a Swedish healthcare perspective. Results: One-month treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin resulted in 12 fewer strokes, 4 additional major bleeds and cost savings of €95 000 per 1000 patients versus aspirin from a Swedish healthcare perspective. This translated into increased quality-adjusted life-years (0.04) and reduced societal costs (-€1358) per patient over a lifetime horizon. Key drivers of cost-effectiveness were number of patients experiencing subsequent disabling stroke and degree of disability. Findings were robust over a range of input assumptions. Conclusion: One month of treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin is likely to improve outcomes and reduce costs versus aspirin in mild-to-moderate AIS or high-risk TIA. Trial registration number: NCT03354429.

Economic evaluation of ticagrelor for secondary prevention following acute coronary syndromes.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To estimate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of ticagrelor in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes (unstable angina or myocardial infarction with or without ST-segment elevation), including patients treated medically and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: A short-term decision tree and a long-term Markov model were used to simulate the evolution of patients' life-cycles. Clinical effectiveness data were collected from the PLATO trial and resource use data were obtained from the Hospital de Santa Marta database, disease-related group legislation and the literature. RESULTS: Ticagrelor provides increases of 0.1276 life years and 0.1106 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per patient. From a societal perspective these clinical gains entail an increase in expenditure of €610. Thus the incremental cost per life year saved is €4780 and the incremental cost per QALY is €5517. CONCLUSIONS: The simulation results show that ticagrelor reduces events compared to clopidogrel. The costs of ticagrelor are partially offset by lower costs arising from events prevented. The use of ticagrelor in clinical practice is therefore cost-effective compared to generic clopidogrel.

Sick leave before and after diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis--a report from the Swedish TIRA project.

OBJECTIVE: Our study describes sick leave during 3 years before and 3 years after diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in relation to referents and identifies predictors for sick leave during the third year after diagnosis of RA. METHODS: One hundred twenty patients (76% women) from the Swedish early RA study TIRA were included. Disease activity and disability were registered regularly during 3 years in TIRA. Referents were matched for sex, age, and home town. Sick leave data were obtained for patients 3 years before and 3 years after diagnosis and for the referents for the corresponding 6 years. RESULTS: No differences were seen between patients and referents regarding sick leave during the first 2 years, whereas sick leave increased in patients 6 months before diagnosis, from 30% to 53%. During the 3 years after diagnosis, sick leave among patients was rather stable, varying between 50% and 60%, even though disability pension increased and sickness benefit decreased. Sick leave before diagnosis, disability 1 year after diagnosis, and type of work were identified as predictors for sick leave during the third year after diagnosis. CONCLUSION: Not surprisingly, sick leave in patients increased the year before diagnosis. Although disease activity and disability diminished after diagnosis, the patients' sick leave remained essentially unchanged. Sick leave 3 years after diagnosis was foremost predicted by earlier sick leave, disability, and type of work.