ArticleClinical drug investigation2016
Cost Effectiveness of Apixaban and Enoxaparin for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism After Total Knee Replacement in China.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Health Economic Analysis of Antiplatelet Therapy for Acute Coronary Syndromes in the Context of Five Eastern Asian Countries.Clinical drug investigation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesApixaban and enoxaparin are indicated for preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of apixaban versus enoxaparin for the prophylaxis of VTE and associated long-term complications in Chinese patients after total knee replacement (TKR).
methodsA decision model, which included both acute VTE (represented as a decision tree) and the long-term complications of VTE (represented as a Markov model), was developed to assess the economic outcomes of the two prophylactic strategies for Chinese patients after TKR. Transition probabilities, costs, and utilities were derived from published literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the uncertainty concerning the model parameters. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and direct medical costs were reported over a 5-year horizon. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were also calculated.
resultsThromboprophylaxis with apixaban was estimated to have a higher cost (US$68) and more health benefits (0.0006 QALYs) than thromboprophylaxis with enoxaparin over a 5.5-year time horizon, resulting in an ICER of US$108,497 per QALY gained. One-way sensitivity analyses found that the cost of apixaban and the probability of pulmonary embolism when taking either apixaban or enoxaparin had a considerable impact on the model outcomes.
conclusionsOverall, the analysis found that the use of enoxaparin in Chinese patients after TKR was likely to be more cost effective than the use of apixaban.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27581246What 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.