The impact of non-pharmacological interventions on adherence to medication and persistence in dyslipidaemia and hypertension: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Suboptimal medication adherence is common among patients with cardiovascular diseases. We sought evidence on non-pharmacological interventions used to support adherence for patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, MEDLINE In-Process, ClinicalTrials.gov, EUCTR, and conference proceedings from July 2011 to July 2021 to identify trials evaluating effects of health education, phone reminders, or digital interventions on medication adherence or persistence of adult patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool v2. RESULTS: Of 64 studies, 62 used health education approaches (e.g. educational interviews, motivational meetings, advice from physicians, and mobile health content), 16 phone reminders (e.g. text reminders, electronic pill-box linked reminders, bi-directional text messaging), and 10 digital applications as interventions (e.g., various self-management applications). All studies assessed medication adherence; only two persistence. Overall, 30 studies (83%) assessing health education approaches alone and 25 (78%) combined with other strategies, 12 (75%) phone reminders and eight studies (80%) digital applications combined with other strategies reported improved medication adherence. Two studies assessing health education approaches reported improved persistence. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate non-pharmacological interventions may positively impact adherence. Therefore, 'beyond the pill' approaches could play a role in preventing cardiovascular diseases.

Impact of poor medication adherence on clinical outcomes and health resource utilization in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia: systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to summarize evidence on the effect of poor medication adherence on clinical outcomes and health resource utilization (HRU) among patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. AREAS COVERED: A systematic review of studies reporting clinical outcomes and HRU for patients by status of adherence to antihypertensives and/or lipid-lowering medications was searched using Embase, MEDLINE, and MEDLINE In-Process and supplemented by manual searches of conference abstracts. In total, 45 studies were included, with most being retrospective observational studies (n = 36). Patients with poor adherence to antihypertensives and lipid-lowering medications compared with those with good adherence showed less reduction of blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) after 6-12 months follow-up (∆ systolic BP: 1.2 vs. -4.5 mmHg; ∆LDL-c: -14.0 to -18.9 vs. -34.1 to -42.0 mg/dL). Poor adherence was also significantly associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events (HR: 1.1-1.9) and mortality (HR: 1.4-1.8) in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia and increased HRU (i.e. outpatient visits, risk of cardiovascular-related and all-cause hospitalization, annual inpatient days, total health-care costs). EXPERT OPINION: Poor adherence is associated with poor clinical outcomes and increased HRU, highlighting the need to enhance medication adherence in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia.

High blood pressure is a leading cause of death and disease burden followed by high lipid levels in blood. Due to the silent nature of the diseases, patients can fall short of optimal medicinal treatment adherence and persistence, leading to poor outcomes and disease complications. The effectiveness of medicinal interventions depends on the appropriate medication-taking behavior of patients as lower adherence can lead to poor treatment benefits. Research was conducted to look for published studies that assessed the effect of lower medication adherence on clinical outcomes and health resource use among patients with high blood pressure, high lipid levels in blood, or both. Researchers were able to find 45 already published studies, from which 32 evaluated the use of blood pressure lowering medications and 7 evaluated the use of lipid-lowering medications, while 6 included patients treated with both types of medications. Refill of pharmacy prescription records was the most common method of assessing treatment adherence. Researchers found that patients with lower adherence to these medications compared with those with good adherence showed less decrease in blood pressure levels and less improvement in blood lipid levels after 6­12 months of follow-up. Patients who had lower adherence also had higher rates of cardiovascular events and deaths and increased usage of health services including visits to outpatient clinics, getting admitted to hospitals, and a longer stay of hospitalizations, leading to a higher overall healthcare cost. These findings suggest lower adherence is associated with poor clinical outcomes and increased health-care resource usage, highlighting the need to improve medication adherence in patients with high blood pressure and high lipid levels in blood.

Impact of single-pill combinations versus free-equivalent combinations on adherence and persistence in patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Hypertension is a leading cause of death and disease burden followed by dyslipidemia. Their asymptomatic nature leads to low adherence and persistence to treatments. A systematic literature review (SLR) investigated the impact of single-pill-combinations (SPC) compared to free-equivalent combination (FEC) on adherence, persistence, clinical outcomes, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and patient-reported outcomes, in patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia, or both. METHODS: MEDLINE, MEDLINE-IN-PROCESS, Embase, and Cochrane were searched from inception until 11 May 2021, for studies comparing SPC against FEC in patients with hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. Patient characteristics, study design, therapies, measures of adherence or persistence, clinical outcomes, and follow-up were extracted. RESULTS: Among 52 studies identified in the SLR, 27 (n = 346,030 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. SPCs were associated with significantly improved adherence compared with FEC, as assessed through medication-possession-ratio ≥80% (odds ratio (OR) 0.42, p < 0.01) and proportion of days covered ≥80% (OR 0.45, p < 0.01). SPC also improved persistence (OR 0.44, p < 0.01) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reduction (mean difference -1.50, p < 0.01) compared with the FEC. CONCLUSIONS: SPC use resulted in significantly improved adherence, persistence, and SBP levels compared with FEC in patients with hypertension. The findings support SPC use in reducing the burden of hypertension and dyslipidemia.

High blood pressure is a leading cause of death and disease burden followed by high lipid levels in the blood. Due to the silent nature of the diseases, patients can fall short of optimal medical treatment adherence and persistence, leading to poor outcomes and disease complications. Simplification of the treatment regimen can be achieved using SPC therapies. The study was conducted to look for published studies that compared the use of SPC with FEC in patients with high blood pressure, high lipid levels in the blood, or both. The researchers were able to find 52 already published studies, of which, 27 studies reported adherence, persistence, and SBP reduction which were included in the data analysis. Researchers found SPCs to be associated with much greater improved adherence and persistence and a higher reduction in SBP when compared with FEC in high blood pressure patients. These findings support SPC use in reducing the burden of high blood pressure and high lipid levels in the blood.

Ivabradine in patients with heart failure: a systematic literature review.

Background: Heart failure is a chronic disease linked with significant morbidity and mortality, and uncontrolled resting heart rate is a risk factor for adverse outcomes. This systematic literature review aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of ivabradine in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods: We searched electronic databases from their inception to July 2021 to include studies that reported on efficacy, safety, or PROs of ivabradine in patients with HFrEF. Results: Of 1947 records screened, 51 RCTs and 6 observational studies were identified. Ivabradine on top of background therapy demonstrated a significant reduction in composite outcomes including hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death. In addition, observational studies suggested that ivabradine was associated with a significant reduction in mortality. Across all studies, ivabradine use on top of background therapy was associated with greater reductions in heart rate, improved EF, and improved health-related quality of life (QoL) and comparable risk of total adverse events compared to those treated with background therapy alone. Conclusions: Ivabradine on top of background therapy is beneficial for heart rate, hospitalization risk for HF, mortality, EF, and patients' QoL. Moreover, these benefits were achieved with no significant increase in the overall risk of total adverse events.

Assessment of the burden of disease for patients with peripheral artery disease undergoing revascularization in England.

Background: Symptoms, severity, and acuteness of peripheral artery disease (PAD) are major determinants of severe limb symptoms, subsequent risk of cardiovascular events, and mortality. Lower-extremity revascularization (LER) is a key option to relieve symptoms and to prevent limb loss in symptomatic patients with PAD. This study aimed to quantify the burden of disease among patients with PAD-LER in England. Methods: A retrospective population-based study of linked primary and secondary care electronic health records, included 13,869 adult patients (aged ⩾ 18 years) with PAD-LER from 2003 to 2018. The incidence of first ever PAD-LER was estimated both overall and by type of procedure (endovascular/surgical). Health resource utilization associated with PAD-related complications and treatment patterns were assessed. Results: A high annual incidence of lower-limb revascularization (41.2 per 1000 person years) and a nearly double incidence of endovascular first revascularization compared with open surgery were observed. More than 70% of patients with PAD-LER had a history of hyperlipidemia and hypertension and roughly one-third were diabetic and had a history of coronary artery disease. Cardiovascular mortality accounted for one-third (34.1 per 1000 person years) of all-cause mortality. Over 93% of patients were hospitalized for any reason and the commonest reasons for hospitalization were cardiovascular diseases and PAD with about one-third hospitalized for revascularization reoccurrence. Conclusion: There is a significant burden of PAD-LER to the individual and society with ongoing healthcare resource utilization, treatment, and increasing mortality.

Real-world cost-effectiveness analysis of NOACs versus VKA for stroke prevention in Spain.

AIMS: A Markov model was adapted to assess the real-world cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban. Each of these non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants was compared with vitamin K antagonist for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Spain. METHODS: All inputs were derived from real-world studies: baseline patient characteristics, clinical event rates, as well as persistence rates for the vitamin K antagonist treatment option. A meta-analysis of real-world studies provided treatment effect and persistence data for rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban, each compared with vitamin K antagonist therapy. The model considered 3-month cycles over a lifetime horizon. The model outcomes included different costs, quality-adjusted life years and life-years gained. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. RESULTS: When compared with vitamin K antagonist, rivaroxaban incurred incremental costs of €77 and resulted in incremental quality-adjusted life years of 0.08. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year was €952. For the same comparison, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year for dabigatran was €4,612. Finally, compared with vitamin K antagonist, the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year for apixaban was €32,015. The sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base case results. The probabilities to be cost-effective versus vitamin K antagonist were 94%, 86% and 35%, respectively, for rivaroxaban, dabigatran and apixaban, considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of €22,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained, based on a cost-effectiveness study of the Spanish National Health System. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that rivaroxaban and dabigatran are cost-effective versus vitamin K antagonist for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation, from the Spanish National Health System perspective.

Real-world cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban vs VKA in stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality associated with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) imposes a substantial economic burden on the UK healthcare system. OBJECTIVES: An existing Markov model was adapted to assess the real-world cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban and apixaban, each compared with a vitamin K antagonist (VKA), for stroke prevention in patients with NVAF from the National Health Service (NHS) and personal and social services (PSS) perspective. METHODS: The model considered a cycle length of 3 months over a lifetime horizon. All inputs were drawn from real-world evidence (RWE): baseline patient characteristics, clinical event and persistence rates, treatment effect (meta-analysis of RWE studies), utility values and resource use. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year was £14,437 for rivaroxaban, and £20,101 for apixaban, compared with VKA. The probabilities to be cost-effective compared with VKA were 90% and 81%, respectively for rivaroxaban and apixaban, considering a £20,000 threshold. In both comparisons, the results were most sensitive to clinical event rates. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that rivaroxaban and apixaban are cost-effective vs VKA, based on RWE, considering a £20,000 threshold, from the NHS and PSS perspective in the UK for stroke prevention in patients with NVAF. This economic evaluation may provide valuable information for decision-makers, in a context where RWE is more accessible and its value more acknowledged.

Use of real-world evidence in meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness models.

Real-world evidence (RWE) provides external validity, supplementing and enhancing the randomized controlled trial data with valuable information on patient behaviors and outcomes, turning efficacy and safety results into real-world effectiveness and risks, but the use of RWE is associated with challenges. The objectives of this communication were to (1) summarize all guidance on how to conduct an RWE meta-analysis (MA) and how to develop an RWE cost-effectiveness model, (2) to describe our experience, challenges faced and solutions identified, (3) to provide recommendations on how to conduct such analyses. No formal guidelines on how to conduct an RWE MA or to develop an RWE cost-effectiveness model were identified. Using the context of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, we conducted an RWE MA, after having identified sources of uncertainty. We then implemented the results in an RWE cost-effectiveness model, defined as a model where all inputs come from RWE, including all parameters related to treatment effect. Based on challenges faced, our first recommendation relates to the necessity of conducting sensitivity analyses, either based on clinical or methodological considerations. Our second recommendation is the need for extensive collaboration with a wide range of experts, during the development of the analyses protocols, the implementation of the analyses and the interpretation of the results. RWE may address a number of gaps related to the treatment effect, and RWE economic evaluations for the treatment effect can provide extremely valuable insights into real-world economic value of interventions. As the increased recognition of the value of RWE could influence health technology assessment decision, and current practices, this communication supports the urgent need of more formal guidelines.

Antithrombotic Treatments in Patients with Chronic Coronary Artery Disease or Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials.

AIMS: Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is widely used for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD), but the risk of vascular events remains high. We aimed at identifying randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on antithrombotic treatments in patients with chronic CAD or PAD. METHODS: Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL on March 1st, 2018. This systematic review (SR) uses a narrative synthesis to summarize the evidence for the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies in the population of both chronic CAD or PAD patients. RESULTS: Four RCTs from 27 publications were included. Study groups included 15,603 to 27,395 patients. ASA alone was the most extensively studied (n = 3); other studies included rivaroxaban with or without ASA (n = 1), vorapaxar alone (n = 1), and clopidogrel with (n = 1) or without ASA (n = 1). Clopidogrel alone and clopidogrel plus ASA compared to ASA presented similar efficacy with comparable safety profile. Rivaroxaban plus ASA significantly reduced the risk of the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke compared to ASA alone, although major bleeding with rivaroxaban plus ASA increased. CONCLUSION: There is limited and heterogeneous evidence on the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with chronic CAD or PAD. Clopidogrel alone and clopidogrel plus ASA did not demonstrate superiority over ASA alone. A combination of rivaroxaban plus ASA may offer significant additional benefit in reducing cardiovascular outcomes, yet it may increase the risk of bleeding, compared to ASA alone.

Systematic Literature Review of Randomized Trials Comparing Antithrombotic Therapy Following Revascularization Procedures in Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease.

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify and summarize the clinical efficacy and safety of available antithrombotic therapies after peripheral endovascular or surgical revascularization in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). Five databases were searched using free-text and Emtree/Mesh terms for PAD, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and antithrombotic therapies of interest (ie, single antiplatelet therapy, dual antiplatelet therapy, and vitamin K antagonists). Randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion if they assessed the risk of thrombotic events (ie, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death, limb ischemia, or limb amputation) or safety profile (ie, minor, moderate, major, or fatal bleeding events) after revascularization. In total, 16 RCTs were identified. Only a few studies reported on treatment effects of the investigated therapies. Myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death, and amputation were reported in up to 2.3%, 2.3%, 5.6%, and 7.3% of patients, respectively. Bleeding events were observed in up to 8.4% (major) and 1.5% (fatal) of patients. Despite available treatments, patients with PAD undergoing revascularization remain at risk of thrombotic events. There is a need for new treatments that will help to optimize care for patients with symptomatic PAD undergoing revascularization.

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.

Real-world cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban compared with vitamin K antagonists in the context of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation in France.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the real-world cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban, versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) from a French national health insurance perspective. METHODS: A Markov model was developed with a lifetime horizon and cycle length of 3 months. All inputs were drawn from real-world evidence (RWE) studies: data on baseline patient characteristics at model entry were obtained from a French RWE study, clinical event rates as well as persistence rates for the VKA treatment arm were estimated from a variety of RWE studies, and a meta-analysis provided comparative effectiveness for rivaroxaban compared to VKA. Model outcomes included costs (drug costs, clinical event costs, and VKA monitoring costs), quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and life-years (LY) gained, incremental cost per QALY, and incremental cost per LY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model and to better understand the results drivers. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, the incremental total cost was €714 and the total incremental QALYs and LYs were 0.12 and 0.16, respectively. The resulting incremental cost/QALY and incremental cost/LY were €6,006 and €4,586, respectively. The results were more sensitive to the inclusion of treatment-specific utility decrements and clinical event rates. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no official willingness-to-pay threshold in France, these results suggest that rivaroxaban is likely to be cost-effective compared to VKA in French patients with AF from a national insurance perspective.

Economic burden of coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease in patients at high risk of ischemic events in the French setting: a claims database analysis.

Aims: Estimate the direct costs of high-risk patients presenting with coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) in France.Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study used a representative claims database, the "Echantillon Généraliste de Bénéficiaires" (EGB), to identify patients presenting with CAD or PAD between 2011 and 2016. Among those, patients meeting the COMPASS trial selection criteria were selected, as well as controls matched on age and sex. Direct costs (Euros 2016) were estimated in a societal perspective by comparing case and controls.Results: The adult population presenting with CAD or PAD in the EGB in 2016 was estimated at 29,888 individuals, representing a crude prevalence rate of 5.44%. After using the documented selection criteria of the COMPASS study, this population (COMPASS-like) was estimated at 17,369 individuals (58.1% of the CAD and/or PAD total population). Among them, a proportion of 11.5% presented with CAD + PAD. Compared with the original COMPASS population, patients were older (76.5 vs 68.2 years) and with a lower male predominance (60.0% vs 78.2% males). Compared with controls, the COMPASS-like population was characterized by a higher annual mortality (5.9% vs 3.5%) and the presence of more comorbidities on top of CAD and/or PAD. The annual per capita extra direct cost of the COMPASS-like population was estimated at €4,284, with a main contribution from inpatient care (58.9%). This extra cost was higher in the PAD ± CAD sub-group (€5,552) and the CAD + PAD sub-group (€8,067).Limitations: The EGB had limitations about several clinical features defining high-risk patients that may lead to bias in our estimates.Conclusions: Due to the high prevalence of CAD and/or PAD and the associated high unit costs, this population generates a significant economic burden, which is higher among patients with PAD and in those presenting simultaneously with both conditions.

Health economic evaluation of rivaroxaban in the treatment of patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease.

AIMS: In the COMPASS trial, rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily (bid) plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) 100 mg once daily (od) performed better than ASA 100 mg od alone in reducing the rate of cardiovascular disease, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD). A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban plus ASA vs. ASA alone over a lifetime horizon, from the UK National Health System perspective. METHODS AND RESULTS: The base case analysis assumed that patients entered the model in the event-free health state, with the possibility to experience ≤2 events, transitioning every three-month cycle, through acute and post-acute health states of MI, ischaemic stroke (IS), or intracranial haemorrhage (ICH), and death. Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life years-all discounted at 3.5%-and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted, as well as scenario analyses. In the model, patients on rivaroxaban plus ASA lived for an average of 14.0 years with no IS/MI/ICH, and gained 9.7 QALYs at a cost of £13 947, while those receiving ASA alone lived for an average of 12.7 years and gained 9.3 QALYs at a cost of £8126. The ICER was £16 360 per QALY. This treatment was cost-effective in 98% of 5000 iterations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £30 000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: This Markov model suggests that rivaroxaban 2.5 mg bid plus ASA is a cost-effective alternative to ASA alone in patients with chronic CAD or PAD.

A Targeted Literature Review of the Disease Burden in Patients With Symptomatic Peripheral Artery Disease.

Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) have an increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) and limb events, but the disease is frequently underdiagnosed and treatment options are limited. This review examines the disease burden of symptomatic PAD as well as key guideline recommendations. Publications were identified using the ProQuest portal to access the Medline, Medline In-Process, and Embase databases. Search terms for symptomatic PAD were combined with terms relevant to epidemiology, burden, treatment practice, and physiopathology. Articles in English published between January 2001 and September 2016 were screened according to the population, interventions, comparator, outcomes, and study design criteria. Relevant publications (n = 200) were identified. The reported incidence and prevalence of PAD varied depending on the definitions used and the study populations. Patients generally had a poor prognosis, with an increased risk of mortality, CV, and limb events and decreased quality of life. Guideline recommendations included ankle-brachial index measurements, exercise testing, and angiography for diagnosis and risk factor modification, antiplatelets, cilostazol, exercise therapy, or surgical interventions for treatment, depending on the patient profile. The clinical, humanistic, and economic burden of disease in patients with symptomatic PAD is substantial and needs to be reduced through improved PAD management.

Temporal trends in the incidence, treatment patterns, and outcomes of coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease in the UK, 2006-2015.

AIMS: Most reports estimating national incidence rates of coronary (CAD) and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) have focused on stable outpatients or acute or elective hospital admissions, but not on the overall burden of disease. In this study, we report the changing trends in the population-level incidence of CAD and PAD, respectively from 2006 to 2015, statin utilization for secondary prevention and survival outcomes using multiple nationally representative data sources from the UK (primary care encounters, hospital admissions, and procedure-level data). METHODS AND RESULTS: A nationally representative study of linked primary and secondary care electronic health records of 4.6 million individuals from the UK. We calculated crude and standardized annual incidence rates separately for CAD and PAD. Statin use for secondary prevention, trends in annual major vascular event rates, and mortality between 2006 and 2015, were estimated for CAD and PAD, respectively. We identified 160 376 and 70 753 patients with incident CAD and PAD, respectively. The age- and sex-standardized incidence of CAD was similar in 2006 (443 per 100 000 person-years) and 2015 [436 per 100 000 person-years; adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96-1.00]. In contrast, there was a 15% decline in the standardized incidence of PAD (236 per 100 000 person-years in 2006 to 202 per 100 000 person-years in 2015; adjusted IRR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82-0.88). The proportion of incident CAD and PAD patients prescribed long-term statins, was only 66% and 55%, respectively and was less common amongst women, patients aged >70 years, with heart failure, chronic lung disease, or depression. Cardiovascular mortality declined by 43% for incident CAD (adjusted IRR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50-0.64) between 2006 and 2015 but did not decline for incident PAD (adjusted IRR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-1.00). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: In the UK, the standardized incidence of CAD appears stable but mortality rates are falling, whereas the standardized incidence of PAD is falling but mortality rates are not.

Epidemiology, treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with coronary or lower extremity artery disease in France.

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of updated epidemiological data on the prevalence and annual incidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) and lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) in Western countries. AIMS: To describe the incidence and prevalence of CAD and LEAD, associated medication patterns and long-term outcomes in France. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using French claims data from a representative sample of the French general population. Any hospitalization or long-term disease status for CAD or LEAD between January 2010 and December 2016 was collected to identify incident cases. RESULTS: Of the 763,338patients screened in the study period, 8559 incident cases of CAD and 4399 of LEAD were identified, with an overall mean follow-up of 2.9±2.0years. The incidence of CAD, LEAD and CAD or LEAD remained stable over the years, and in 2016 were at 33.5 per 10,000person-years, 15.1per 10,000person-years and 42.5 per 10,000person-years, respectively. The prevalence of CAD increased from 3.1% in 2010 to 4.2% in 2016, and LEAD from 1.6% to 2.4%. Most patients received guideline-recommended medication with antithrombotic drugs and lipid-lowering drugs following the index event. However, most of the medications initiated were subsequently discontinued during follow-up. Incident CAD or LEAD was associated with considerable morbidity-particularly an incidence of all-cause hospitalization of 7976.9 per 10,000person-years-and all-cause mortality, with an incidence of 542.8 per 10,000person-years. CONCLUSION: In recent years, the prevalence of CAD or LEAD has increased progressively, resulting in considerable morbidity and mortality.

Impact of methodological choices on a meta-analysis of real-world evidence comparing non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants with vitamin K antagonists for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of methodological choices in a meta-analysis of real-world evidence (RWE) comparing three non-vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Methods: The meta-analysis was based on a systematic review of RWE studies enrolling incident and prevalent patients aged ≥18 years with NVAF and receiving either rivaroxaban, dabigatran, apixaban or a VKA. Five different scenarios were considered to explore the impact of the initial meta-analysis assumptions: (1) using studies that involved only incident patients; (2) excluding studies that only reported crude values and did not consider any adjustment; (3) including all studies independently of possible database overlap; (4) using studies with data on different dosages for rivaroxaban and dabigatran; and (5) assigning quality weights to studies to assess quality of reporting. These scenarios were run on three outcomes: ischemic stroke (IS), myocardial infarction (MI) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). Results: Across all scenarios, rivaroxaban was associated with significantly lower risks of IS and ICH than VKAs. In most scenarios, dabigatran was associated with significantly lower risks of IS and ICH. In all scenarios, apixaban was associated with a significantly lower risk of ICH. Conclusions: Sensitivity analyses showed the impact of similar assumptions was different depending on the outcome and the drug considered. The development of recommendations and guidelines for the inclusion of RWE in meta-analyses could prove useful in evaluating the effectiveness of health care interventions.

Number needed to treat based on real-world evidence for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation.

Aims: Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are used to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This paper aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of NOACs when compared to VKAs by calculating the number needed to treat (NNT) at 2 years using incidence rates and hazard ratios (HRs) derived from a meta-analysis of studies conducted in real-world settings. Materials and methods: HRs were sourced from a published systematic literature review and a meta-analysis of real-world evidence on the use of NOACs vs VKAs. Rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban vs VKAs were investigated. The efficacy outcomes included: a composite of ischaemic stroke and systemic embolism (IS/SE), ischaemic stroke (IS), and all-cause mortality. The safety analysis assessed major bleeding and intracranial haemorrhage (ICH). Results: Superiority of NOACs vs VKAs was observed in 10/15 comparisons. Treating patients with rivaroxaban and dabigatran was associated with a reduced risk of IS and all-cause mortality compared to VKAs, with one death prevented every 22 and 32 patients, respectively, and one IS prevented every 206 and 166 patients, respectively. Rivaroxaban was significantly associated with a reduced risk of IS/SE compared to VKA (NNT: 107). No significant differences were observed between apixaban and VKAs. Dabigatran and apixaban were associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding compared to VKA (NNT: 59 and 38, respectively). No significant difference was observed between rivaroxaban and VKAs regarding major bleeding. Rivaroxaban, dabigatran, and apixaban were significantly associated with a reduced risk of ICH (NNT: 205, 115, and 108, respectively). Limitations: Heterogeneity in definitions of major bleeding across studies. Conclusions: The NNT calculation, when approached and interpreted properly, is a practical measure of the effectiveness of a treatment. The calculation based on HRs showed that NOACs are safe and effective alternatives to VKAs in real life.

Psychometric validation of anti-clot treatment scale and treatment satisfaction questionnaire for medication version II in Japanese patients with atrial fibrillation.

Aims: The Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS) and Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication version II (TSQM-II) are validated treatment satisfaction patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments. The ACTS includes two domains: Burdens and Benefits; the TSQM-II includes four: Effectiveness, Side Effects, Convenience, and Global Satisfaction. Japanese-language versions of the ACTS and TSQM-II have been developed and linguistically validated. This study aimed to assess their psychometric properties in Japanese patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Materials and methods: ACTS and TSQM-II data from 534 patients with AF were collected in a Japanese post-marketing surveillance study of a direct oral-anticoagulant, rivaroxaban. Four key psychometric properties, in line with best practice guidelines from the US Food and Drug Administration, were examined using traditional psychometric methods: acceptability, scaling assumptions, reliability (i.e. internal consistency reliability, test-retest reliability), and construct validity (i.e. convergent validity and known groups). Results: ACTS Burdens and Benefits and TSQM-II Effectiveness, Convenience, and Global Satisfaction scales were found to be acceptable (e.g. item-level missing data at baseline <4%), with all scales having good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha > 0.80). test-retest reproducibility intraclass correlation coefficients for the ACTS Burdens and Benefits were 0.59 and 0.65, respectively, and between 0.54-0.61 for the TSQM-II scales. Known-groups validity for the ACTS and TSQM-II was supported by differences in scale scores by positive and negative impact (p < 0.05). Correlations between the ACTS and TSQM-II (convergent validity) were lower than expected (range r = 0.09-0.48), but in line with the original ACTS development study. Limitations: Evaluation of test-retest reproducibility was limited by assessment period, which was longer (3 months) than recommended guidelines (usually up to 2 weeks). Conclusions: Overall, Japanese versions of ACTS and TSQM-II scales satisfied internal consistency reliability and traditional validity criteria. Our study supports the ACTS and TSQM-II as appropriate PRO instruments to measure satisfaction with anticoagulant treatment in Japanese patients with AF. Trial registration: NCT01598051, clinicaltrials.gov; registered April 20, 2012.