Economic Evaluation of Andexanet Versus Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Reversal of Factor Xa-Associated Intracranial Hemorrhage.

[Figure: see text].

Choosing the Best Approach to Warfarin Reversal After Traumatic Intracranial Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Patients on warfarin with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage often have the warfarin effects pharmacologically reversed. We compared outcomes among patients who received 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), fresh frozen plasma (FFP), or no reversal to assess the real-world impact of PCC on elderly patients with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 150 patients on preinjury warfarin. Data were manually abstracted from the electronic medical record of an academic level 1 trauma center for patients admitted between January 2013 and December 2018. Outcomes were ICH progression on follow-up computed tomography scan, mortality, need for surgical intervention, and trends in the use of reversal agents. RESULTS: Of 150 patients eligible for analysis, 41 received FFP, 60 PCC, and 49 were not reversed. On multivariable analysis, patients not reversed [OR 0.25 95% CI (0.31-0.85)] and women [OR 0.38 95% CI (0.17-0.88)] were less likely to experience progression of their initial bleed on follow-up computed tomography while subdural hemorrhage increased the risk [OR 3.69 95% CI (1.27-10.73)]. There was no difference between groups in terms of mortality or need for surgery. Over time use of reversal with PCC increased while use of FFP and not reversing warfarin declined (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Male gender and using a reversal agent were associated with progression of ICH. Choice of reversal did not impact the need for surgery, hospital length of stay, or mortality. Some ICH patients may not require warfarin reversal and may bias studies, especially retrospective studies of warfarin reversal.

Plasma fractionation in countries with limited infrastructure and low-/medium income: How to move forward?

Although therapeutic drivers are changing over the years, and innovative biotech products are continuously modifying the clinical landscape, there is an increasing need for plasma protein therapies obtained by the fractionation of human plasma. Plasma-derived protein products therefore continue to play vital roles in the therapeutic management of various immunological disorders, deficiencies in coagulation factors or protease inhibitors, viral or bacterial infections, and trauma. Plasma fractionation is a biotechnology industry that has increased in complexity over the last 30 years to ensure that plasma-derived protein therapies exhibit optimal quality and pathogen safety profiles. Plasma-derived products are among the safest biological therapies available; in industrialized countries they are strictly and efficiently regulated in all aspects of their production chain and clinical use. Conversely, due to some technological complexities and strict adherence to regulatory requirements, a substantial barrier to entry into the field of plasma fractionation exists. Although various plasma-derived protein products are on the WHO model list of essential medicines, dramatic shortages of these products exist, especially in low-/medium income countries, while at the same time more than 9 million liters of recovered plasma in these countries are wasted annually. Lack of plasma protein products results mainly from three factors: (a) cost of imported products, (b) insufficient local supply of quality plasma for fractionation, or (c) lack of domestic industrial fractionation capacity. As the understanding of critical quality and safety factors has dramatically improved over the years, there is a need to rethink how affordable, scalable, and reliable purification and virus inactivation technologies could be introduced in countries with poor relevant infrastructures and low-/medium income. Such technologies, when properly validated and implemented, could help ensure local availability of essential plasma protein therapies and gradually fill the gap in product supply, safety and affordability that exists relative to advanced economies.

Cost comparison of andexanet versus prothrombin complex concentrates for direct factor Xa inhibitor reversal after hemorrhage.

Andexanet-alpha is a specific reversal agent for direct factor Xa inhibitors (dFXaI). We aimed to project utilization rates and cost of andexanet for reversal of dFXaI-related major hemorrhage compared to 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCC). A retrospective, multicenter review was conducted between 1/1/2014 and 7/15/2018 of patients who received 4F-PCC for reversal of dFXaI-related life-threatening hemorrhages. Total hospital reimbursements/patient were calculated based on national average MS-DRG payments adjusting for Medicare discounts. The projected cost for andexanet (based on dose and insurance) and % reimbursement/patient was compared to the actual cost of 4F-PCC. Hemostasis at 24 h (excellent/good vs. poor) and 30-day thrombotic complications were assessed. Of 126 patients who received 4F-PCC to reverse dFXaI, 46 (~ 10 per-year) met inclusion criteria. The median projected cost of andexanet was $22,120/patient, compared to $5670/patient for 4F-PCC (P < 0.001). The median hospital reimbursement was $11,492/hospitalization. The projected cost of andexanet alone would exceed the entire hospital reimbursement in 74% of patients by a median of $7604, while 4F-PCC cost exceeded the total hospital payments in 7% of patients in the same cohort (P < 0.001). Hemostasis was excellent/good in 72% of patients post-4F-PCC, compared to 82% in andexanet trials. Thromboembolic events occurred in 4% of patients following 4F-PCC versus 10% in andexanet trials. The projected cost of andexanet would exceed the national average hospital reimbursement/patient in nearly 75% of patients by over $7500/hospitalization. 4F-PCC was significantly less expensive, had lower rates of thrombosis, but also lower rates of good/excellent hemostasis compared to published data for andexanet.

Emergent reversal of oral factor Xa inhibitors with four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding first-line use of the recently approved reversal agent andexanet alfa due to limitations of the ANEXXA-4 study, thrombotic risks, and high medication acquisition cost. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 4F-PCC for the reversal of emergent oral fXa inhibitor-related bleeding. Furthermore, we aimed to evaluate a subgroup using strict ANNEXA-4 patient selection criteria. METHODS: This was a retrospective study conducted utilizing chart review of adult patients that received 4F-PCC for oral fXa inhibitor-related bleeding. The primary endpoint was the rate of clinical success defined as achieving excellent or good hemostatic effectiveness following the administration of 4F-PCC. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality and arterial/venous thromboembolism, and cost compared with andexanet alfa. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients were included, with 83 patients in the ANNEXA-4 criteria subgroup. Eighty-five of the 119 patients (71%) required reversal due to intracranial bleeding. Prior to reversal, 70 patients (59%) were taking apixaban and 49 patients (41%) were taking rivaroxaban. Clinical success was achieved in 106 of 119 patients (89%) and 74 of 83 patients (90%) in the strict criteria subgroup. Three of 119 patients (2.5%) had a thrombotic event during hospital stay and the overall mortality rate was 13%. The average cost increase of andexanet alfa compared to 4F-PCC would have been $29,500 per patient. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of 4F-PCC for the reversal of oral fXa inhibitors was effective with relatively low thrombotic risk. Further direct prospective comparison of 4F-PCC to andexanet alfa is warranted.

On-label compared to off-label four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate use: a retrospective, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is US Food and Drug Administration approved for the urgent reversal of coagulation factor deficiency induced by a vitamin K antagonist complicated by acute major bleeding or in situations in which invasive procedures are urgently needed. Although recent evidence suggests the superiority of 4F-PCC over plasma for on-label indications, the off-label use of 4F-PCC has not been rigorously studied. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Eighty-nine patients receiving 4F-PCC at a single institution from July 2016 to December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Two cohorts, "On-Label" and "Off-Label" uses of 4F-PCC, were evaluated, comparing patient characteristics, blood utilization, and clinical outcomes including in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Patients receiving 4F-PCC for off-label reasons (n = 46) were younger and sicker compared to those receiving 4F-PCC for on-label reasons (n = 43). Notably, the mortality rate for off-label use was approximately twofold greater than the mortality rate for on-label use (26 of 46 [56.5%] vs. 12 of 43 [27.9%]; p = 0.006). Patients receiving 4F-PCC for off-label reasons received more units per patient of each blood component than their on-label counterparts. The average cost estimate per patient for 4F-PCC was similar (approx. $4300) in each cohort. CONCLUSION: 4F-PCC is an effective but expensive treatment option for those requiring urgent reversal of vitamin K antagonist-induced coagulopathy. However, providers should be conscious of the high costs and questionable efficacy when using 4F-PCC off-label.

Safety, efficacy, and cost of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) in patients with factor Xa inhibitor-related bleeding: a retrospective study.

Oral factor Xa (fXa) inhibitor-related bleeding is a concerning drug safety problem. There is considerable controversy surrounding available reversal strategies. The recently approved reversal agent andexanet alfa has limited data, an unclear safety profile, and imparts a substantial financial burden. This has led to the off-label use of four-factor prothrombin complex concentrates (4F-PCC) for this indication. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of 4F-PCC for the management of major bleeding related to oral fXa inhibitors. This observational, retrospective study included adult patients admitted from 2014 to 2018 who received 4F-PCC (Kcentra®) for fXa inhibitor-related major bleeding. Efficacy was assessed using criteria described by Sarode et al. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of thromboembolism, mortality, and a cost analysis comparing 4F-PCC to andexanet alfa for reversal of oral fXa inhibitors. Thirty-one patients received 4F-PCC for major bleeding associated with apixaban (55%) or rivaroxaban (45%). Intracranial hemorrhage (58%) and pericardial effusion (16%) accounted for the majority of bleeding events. Most patients received a single weight-based 4F-PCC dose of 25 units/kg (38.7%) or 50 units/kg (51.6%). Effective hemostasis was achieved in 80.6% of patients. Five patients (16%) died due to acute bleeding and no thromboembolic events were observed. Administration of 4F-PCC was effective for most patients requiring emergent reversal of anticoagulation with apixaban or rivaroxaban and was associated with a low risk of thromboembolic events. Considerable cost differences limit the use of andexanet alfa and may warrant further study of 4F-PCC for fXa inhibitor reversal.

Comparison of 3-Factor Versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate With Regard to Warfarin Reversal, Blood Product Use, and Costs.

BACKGROUND: Prothrombin complex concentrates (PCCs) are drug products containing varying amounts of vitamin K-dependent coagulation factors II, VII, IX, and X. The evidence comparing 3-factor PCC (3-PCC) versus 4-factor PCC (4-PCC) for warfarin reversal is conflicting. It has been hypothesized that 3-PCC may be less effective than 4-PCC because of relatively lower factor VII content. STUDY QUESTION: The primary objective of this study was to compare international normalized ratio (INR) reversal between 3-PCC and 4-factor PCC (4-PCC) in warfarin-treated patients. The secondary objectives include comparing blood product use, total reversal costs, and cost-effectiveness between the groups. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in 2 affiliated, academic institutions in the United States. Consecutive adult patients who received 3-PCC or 4-PCC for warfarin reversal were included. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was adequate INR reversal defined as a final INR ≤1.5. Secondary outcomes were the utilization of plasma, red blood cells and platelets, reversal costs, and the cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: There were 89 patients who were included in the overall cohort (3-PCC = 57, 4-PCC = 32). Adequate INR reversal occurred less commonly with 3-PCC (45.6%) compared with 4-PCC (87.5%) (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients who received plasma (32% vs. 28%, P = 0.813), red blood cells (37% vs. 47%, P = 0.377), or platelets (16% vs. 28%, P = 0.180) between the 3-PCC and 4-PCC groups, respectively. The median reversal cost of 3-PCC ($3663) was lower than 4-PCC ($5105) (P = 0.001). The cost-effective ratio favored 4-PCC ($5105/87.5% = $5834) compared with 3-PCC ($3663/45.6% = $8033). CONCLUSIONS: Four-PCC was more effective than 3-PCC with regard to INR reversal in patients taking warfarin, but blood product use was similar. Although 4-PCC is associated with increased reversal costs, it may be cost-effective in terms of INR reversal.

Fixed dose 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate for the emergent reversal of warfarin: a retrospective analysis.

Published literature suggests that a fixed-dose 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4FPCC) may be efficacious in managing warfarin-associated hemorrhage, however the ideal dose is still unclear. The purpose of this evaluation was to determine the efficacy of fixed-dose 4FPCC in reducing the International Normalized Ratio (INR) to ≤ 1.5 among warfarin patients with need for urgent or emergent anticoagulation reversal. Starting October 2016, our institution changed from standard 4FPCC FDA-labeled dosing based on the patient's presenting INR and weight, to a fixed-dose of 1500 units for all patients requiring urgent or emergent warfarin reversal. We conducted a retrospective evaluation, after implementation, with the primary outcome being the proportion of patients who achieved an INR ≤ 1.5 with a single fixed-dose of 1500 units of 4FPCC. Secondary outcomes assessed included: medication turnaround times, attainment of target INR ≤ 2 or clinical hemostasis (as judged by the prescribing provider), use of rescue doses, thrombotic events, and cost savings. A total of 37 patients were included in the analysis. Almost 75% of patients achieved an INR ≤ 1.5 after a single fixed dose of 1500 units, and 100% of patients achieved an INR ≤ 2. The median pre- and post-dose INRs were 3.06 and 1.32 respectively. Based on this evaluation, the administration of a fixed dose of 1500 units 4FPCC, was shown to be effective in adequately reversing the INR in the majority of patients with minimal thrombotic risks.

[Cost of clotting factors in hospitalization]. / Coût des facteurs antihémophiliques en hospitalisation.

OBJECTIVES: Hemophilia is a rare genetic disease, characterized by uncontrolled bleeding. Injections of clotting factor are the principal are the principal treatment. This drug is very expensive. The objectives of this study are to determine the cost of clotting factor for in patients and the factor impacting this cost. METHODS: A retrospective study was carried on hemophiliac in patients between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015 in Cochin hospital and having received at least an injection of clotting factor during their hospitalization. A collection of clinical data and treatments received during the hospitalization was realized for every patient. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included in the study with a total of 68 hospitalizations. The median cost of clotting factors by hospitalization was 16,908€. The median part of clotting factors on the total cost of the hospitalization was 68.2%. The cost of factors by stay was higher for the severe haemophiliacs (P=0.015) and for the major surgeries (P<0.0001). The daily median cost of clotting factors was 3124€. This cost was higher at the haemophiliacs B (P=0.0112), the severe haemophiliacs (P<0.0001) and the haemophiliacs with inhibitor (P=0.0053). CONCLUSIONS: Clotting factors represent the most part of the cost of hospitalization of a haemophiliac. Their cost in hospitalization varies according to many factors. It may evolve with the arrival of long-acting clotting factors.

Economic Burden of Illness among Persons with Hemophilia B from HUGS Vb: Examining the Association of Severity and Treatment Regimens with Costs and Annual Bleed Rates.

OBJECTIVES: To determine US societal burden of illness, including direct and indirect costs and annual bleed rate (ABR), for persons with hemophilia B (HB), a rare and debilitating genetic disorder, and to examine associations of hemophilia severity and treatment regimens with costs and ABR. METHODS: From 2009 to 2014, the Hemophilia Utilization Group Studies Part Vb collected prospective data from 10 US hemophilia treatment centers. Participants with HB completed initial surveys on sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns. During the 2-year follow-up, participants reported bleeding episodes, work absenteeism, and caregiver time quarterly. These data were used to calculate ABR and indirect costs. Direct costs were calculated using 1-year clinical chart records and 2-year dispensing records. RESULTS: Of the 148 participants, 112 with complete medical records and one or more follow-up survey were included. Total mean annual per-person costs were $85,852 (median $20,160) for mild/moderate HB, $198,733 (median $147,891) for severe HB, and $140,240 (median $63,617) for all participants without inhibitors (P < 0.0001). Mean ABR for participants with severe HB on prophylaxis (5.5 ± 7.9 bleeds/y) was almost half that of those treated episodically. Clotting factor and indirect costs accounted for 85% and 9% of total costs, respectively. Compared with episodic treatment, prophylaxis use was associated with 2.5-fold higher clotting factor costs (P < 0.01), low but significantly more missed parental workdays (P < 0.0001) and clinician (P < 0.001) or nursing visits (P < 0.0001), less part-time employment and unemployment, and lower hospitalizations costs (P = 0.17) and ABR (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: HB is associated with high economic burden, primarily because of clotting factor costs. Nevertheless, prophylaxis treatment leads to clinical benefits and may reduce other nonfactor costs.

The scope and value of an anticoagulation stewardship program at a community teaching hospital.

To report the impact of an inpatient anticoagulation stewardship program at a community hospital to promote optimal anticoagulant use. The anticoagulation team (ACT) stewardship program consists of two clinical pharmacists and hematologists to provide oversight of anticoagulants, high cost reversal agents including prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC, Kcentra™), and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) management. Intervention data and number of charts reviewed were collected. Average cost avoidance data was applied to ACT interventions to estimate cost savings. The PCC analysis was conducted via retrospective chart review during the pre-intervention period. Prospective monitoring continued in the post-intervention period to determine the percentage of PCC use within the institution's guidelines or approved by ACT or hematology. A total of 19,445 patient charts were reviewed, and 1930 (10%) contained stewardship opportunity. Of the interventions, 71% were provided to the medical service and 22% to surgical services with acceptance rates of 91 and 83%, respectively. Intervention cost-avoidance calculated to be $694,217. Regarding HIT interventions, 52% of interventions involved pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics optimization in 18 patients with suspected or confirmed HIT. Regarding PCC use, 55.8% of PCC orders were considered inappropriate in the pre-invention period versus 2.6% post-intervention. Appropriate PCC doses per month post-intervention were consistent with pre-intervention doses (7.67 vs. 6.73, respectively). The projected annual PCC cost savings is $385,473. The overall estimated financial impact of ACT is $799,690 saved. Implementation of an anticoagulation stewardship program reduced costs and improved clinical outcomes. It is also expected that anticoagulant optimization and provider education improved overall safety.

Economic aspects of intraoperative coagulation management targeting higher fibrinogen concentrations during major craniosynostosis surgery.

BACKGROUND: Results of a previously published study demonstrated a significant decrease in transfusion requirements and calculated blood loss for pediatric major craniosynostosis surgery, if a ROTEM(®) FIBTEM trigger of <13 mm (early substitution group) was applied as compared to a trigger of <8 mm (conventional group). The aim of this study was a posthoc analysis of the costs for this coagulation management. METHODS: The total volume as well as the number of units or bags for all transfused blood products and coagulation factors were recorded for each case. The number of laboratory and point-of-care coagulation tests was also analyzed. Total blood product costs were calculated according to the local prices per unit. RESULTS: The total cost for all transfused/administered blood products/coagulation factors per patient was a median of 1023EUR (IQR 850EUR-1058EUR) in the early substitution group as compared to a median of 910EUR (IQR 719EUR-1351EUR) in the conventional group (P = 0.81). No difference in the number of coagulation tests performed was observed. CONCLUSION: In this study, the use of a higher fibrinogen trigger was not linked to a significant increase in total costs for transfused blood products and coagulation factors, and may offer an economically equivalent approach to coagulation management.

Strategies for inhibitor treatment and costs in the short and long term: a critical evaluation of recent clinical studies.

One important complication of patients with severe haemophilia A is the formation of inhibitory antibodies to factor VIII (FVIII). Immune tolerance induction (ITI) is the treatment of choice for patients with inhibitors, but this approach is successful in about 60% of patients. Treatment of acute bleeding in patients with inhibitors is one of the greatest challenges in haemophilia management and is costly. Bypassing agents are the mainstay of treatment in these patients. The aims of this study were to review the most recent publications concerning the costs of inhibitor treatment. We conducted a literature review using PubMed which yielded 63 papers analysing the costs of inhibitor management of which 12 were suitable for our study. Four of eight studies supported the use of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) with lower costs, but the remaining four studies showed that recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) had a lower average treatment cost. Of four ITI studies, two supported lifelong cost-effectiveness of ITI vs. bypassing agents and the remaining two papers showed a high cost of inhibitor treatment. Dosages, time between onset of bleeding and treatment, patient characteristics and the price of drugs are some of the important issues that should be considered for further studies.

A haemophilia disease management programme targeting cost and utilization of specialty pharmaceuticals.

The high cost of clotting factor concentrate (CFC) used to treat haemophilia and von Willebrand disease (VWD) attracts health plans' attention for cost management strategies such as disease management programmes (DMPs). In 2004, Indiana's high risk insurance health plan, the Indiana Comprehensive Health Insurance Association, in partnership with the Indiana Hemophilia and Thrombosis Center developed and implemented a DMP for beneficiaries with bleeding disorders. This report evaluates the effectiveness of the DMP 5 years post implementation, with specific emphasis on the cost of CFC and other medical expenditures by severity of disease. A pre/post analysis was used. The main evaluation measures were total cost, total outpatient CFC IU dispensed and adjusted total outpatient CFC cost. Summary statistics and mean and median plots were calculated. Overall, 1000 non-parametric bootstrap replicates were created and percentile confidence limits for 95% confidence intervals (CI) are reported. Mean emergency department (ED) visits and mean and median duration of hospitalizations are also reported. The DMP was associated with a significant decrease in mean annualized total cost including decreased CFC utilization and cost in most years in the overall group, and specifically in patients with severe haemophilia. Patients with mild and moderate haemophilia contributed little to overall programme expenditures. This specialty health care provider-administered DMP exemplifies the success of targeted interventions developed and implemented through a health care facility expert in the disease state to curb the cost of specialty pharmaceuticals in conditions when their expenditures represent a significant portion of total annual costs of care.

Purchasing factor concentrates in the 21st century through competitive tendering.

The increasing intensity of treatment, the widespread adoption of factor VIII and IX prophylaxis and increasing usage over the past decade have led to haemophilia becoming an almost uniquely expensive condition to treat. The average adult with severe haemophilia A in the UK used 250,000 IU of factor VIII in 2011/2012, at a cost in excess of £ 100,000 p.a. The cost to the end-user may be considerably higher than this for some US patients supplied by home care companies with high on-costs. This has led to a high level of administrative scrutiny of treatment and an imperative to procure clotting factor concentrates more efficiently and collectively. National procurement schemes have run successfully in various countries and will become commoner. The UK system of procurement is described. This system, following EU procurement rules, evaluated products technically and by price. The price of bioequivalent products was determined by reverse e-auction. Considerable cost reductions were achieved whilst retaining all suppliers and maintaining a degree of prescribing freedom. Elements of this system could be more widely applied.

Tertiary prophylaxis in adults: is there a rationale?

There is lack of evidence-based recommendations or clear-cut consensus regarding the clinical and economic utility of regular prophylaxis started in adulthood, with the aim of keeping the clinical situation from getting worse by prevention of further bleeds contributing to increasing musculo-skeletal or other morbidity in haemophilia. Such a prophylaxis program has been shown in relatively small cohorts to be effective in reducing bleeding occurrence, with a variable effect on the joint status, but with significantly higher factor consumption and consequently higher costs than on-demand therapy. There has been no attempt to identify subsets of patients who may benefit from "tertiary" prophylaxis more than others, for example, due to their bleeding phenotype and/or requirements for product issued on-demand or to identify the dosage that provides the optimal balance of clinical benefit and cost effectiveness. This article reviews the published literature on prophylaxis started beyond the age of 18 years, the barriers to the uptake of prophylaxis programs particularly in adults and highlights areas in need of further research.

Haemophilia prophylaxis: how can we justify the costs?

Severe haemophilia results in increased mortality and poorer quality of life. Factor prophylaxis leads to a more normal life, but is very costly; most of the cost is due to the high cost of replacement factor. Despite its high cost, factor prophylaxis has been adopted throughout the developed world--even in different health care systems. We argue that there are at least five possible reasons why societies may value factor prophylaxis despite its cost: (i) it is directed towards an inherited disease, (ii) the treatment is largely directed towards children, (iii) the disease is rare and the overall cost to society is small, (iv) the treatment is preventative, and v) the high cost is largely the result of providing safe products. In an era of rising health care costs, there is a strong research agenda to establish the factors that determine the value of expensive therapies for rare diseases like haemophilia.