ReviewPharmacoEconomics2010
Fondaparinux: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in the management of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Increased major bleeding risk in patients with kidney dysfunction receiving enoxaparin: a meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2012Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fondaparinux (Arixtra) is an anticoagulant that selectively inhibits activated factor X, thereby interrupting the blood coagulation cascade. In OASIS-5, a large pivotal trial in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), subcutaneous fondaparinux 2.5 mg once daily was noninferior to subcutaneous enoxaparin 1 mg/kg twice daily (both agents were administered over a mean of about 5 days in combination with antiplatelet therapy) in reducing death or ischaemic events at 9 days, and the efficacy was maintained for up to 6 months (study end). However, fondaparinux was associated with a significantly lower rate of bleeding than enoxaparin in the first 9 days, and at 3 and 6 months. This lower rate of bleeding led to lower long-term mortality and morbidity with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin. In modelled cost-utility analyses conducted from a healthcare payer perspective in Spain, France and the US with a lifetime horizon, fondaparinux once daily was predicted to be cost effective relative to enoxaparin twice daily with regard to the incremental cost per QALY gained. In Spain and the US, fondaparinux dominated enoxaparin (i.e. was less costly and more effective) and, in the French analysis, the incremental cost per QALY gained with fondaparinux versus enoxaparin was well within recommended thresholds. Results of short-term (6-month) cost analyses in the US and France also favoured fondaparinux over enoxaparin. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that base-case conclusions were robust over a range of parameter estimates and assumptions, including plausible variations in baseline risk of a cardiac event or baseline risk of bleeding. In conclusion, in patients with NSTE-ACS receiving antiplatelet therapy, fondaparinux was cost effective relative to enoxaparin in cost-utility analyses in Europe and the US. This cost advantage primarily reflects the lower rate of bleeding with fondaparinux than with enoxaparin and the lower rate of mortality and morbidity over the long term.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.