ArticleCardiovascular research2020
Health economic evaluation of rivaroxaban in the treatment of patients with chronic coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease.
Article in Cardiovascular research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01776424 (A Randomized Controlled Trial of Rivaroxaban for the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial of Rivaroxaban for the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease (COMPASS - Cardiovascular OutcoMes for People Using Anticoagulation StrategieS).
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of rivaroxaban plus aspirin versus aspirin alone in patients with stable coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease: a systematic review.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Progress in aorta and peripheral cardiovascular disease research.Cardiovascular research · 2021Pooled it
- The Cost-Effectiveness of Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Compared with Aspirin Alone in the COMPASS Trial: A US Perspective.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2024Trial
- Polypill versus medication monotherapy in the prevention of cardiovascular diseases in Iran: An economic evaluation study.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Cost Effectiveness Analysis Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin versus Aspirin alone in Treatment Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2024Review
- Exercise Therapy in the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2023Review
- Economic Analysis of the CADScor System for Ruling Out Coronary Artery Disease in England.PharmacoEconomics - open · 2022Article
- Commentary: Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Compared With Aspirin Alone in Patients With Coronary and Peripheral Artery Diseases in Italy.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Herb-Drug Interaction Between Danshen and Rivaroxaban in Rat and Human Liver Microsomes.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- Article
- The impact of low-dose anticoagulation therapy on peripheral artery disease: insights from the VOYAGER trial.Cardiovascular research · 2020Article
- Economic Implications of Preventing Major Cardiovascular and Limb Events with Rivaroxaban plus Aspirin in Patients with Coronary or Peripheral Artery Disease in the United States.American health & drug benefitsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsIn 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
resultsThe 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.
conclusionThis 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.
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.