ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2020
Sacubitril-Valsartan Compared With Enalapril for the Treatment of Heart Failure: A Decision-Analytic Markov Model Simulation in China.
Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Model parameters influencing the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan in heart failure: evidence from a systematic literature review.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2023Pooled it
- Sacubitril-valsartan for the treatment of hypertension in China: A cost-utility analysis based on meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Sacubitril/Valsartan for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from the Perspective of the Chinese Healthcare System.Clinical drug investigation · 2023Article
- Sacubitril-valsartanFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Heart failure: a prevalence-based and model-based cost analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Cost effectiveness analyses of pharmacological treatments in heart failure.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Cost-effectiveness of adding empagliflozin to the standard therapy for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction from the perspective of healthcare systems in China.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- MitraClip for the treatment of heart failure with mitral regurgitation: A cost-effectiveness analysis in a Chinese setting.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Adding SGLT2 Inhibitors to Standard Treatment for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction Patients in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesHeart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a major health concern globally due to high mortality rates, frequent hospitalization and considerable medical expenditure. The prevalence of HFrEF is steadily rising in Asian countries, and populous, developing countries like China are facing a significant socio-economic burden as a result. Sacubitril-valsartan (Sac-Val) is currently a class I recommendation for treating HFrEF in major guidelines, although it has not been pharmaco-economically evaluated in China. To this end, we compared the cost-effectiveness of Sac-Val and enalapril based on the negotiated prices in order to fully assess the expected costs and benefits of the clinical use of Sac-Val in China.
methodA Markov model was constructed to estimate long-term clinical and economic outcomes of Sac-Val versus enalapril for HFrEF patients in China over a 10-year horizon. Primary model outcomes were total costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
resultsTreatment with Sac-Val resulted in 4.67 QALYs at the cost of $4,684.25, while enalapril yielded 4.40 QALYs at the cost of $4,014.47. Compared to enalapril, Sac-Val was associated with a gain of 0.27 QALYs, resulting in an ICER of $ 2,480.67 per QALY. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed robust results. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that Sac-Val has a 99.99% probability of being cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay threshold of $10,276.
conclusionFrom Chinese patients' perspective, Sac-Val is a cost-effective treatment option for HFrEF in China compared to enalapril. Our findings can aid clinicians plan the Sac-Val regimen, as well as decision makers to discuss the value and position of novel angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs) in future.
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.