Model-Based Economic Evaluation of the First-in-Class Myosin Inhibitor Mavacamten Versus Care as Usual in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Patients from a Dutch Societal Perspective.

objectivesObstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) is a myocardial disease, characterised by left ventricular hypertrophy, hampering the ventricular blood outflow. Standard of care (SoC) includes medications such as beta-blockers (BB) and calcium channel blockers (CCB) and septal reduction therapies. Recently, mavacamten, a first-in-class myosin inhibitor, became available to oHCM patients. The objective was to develop a decision analytic model to evaluate the cost effectiveness of mavacamten compared with SoC in oHCM patients from a Dutch societal perspective.

methodsA Markov model was developed in R based on the Decision Analysis in R for Technologies in Health framework with data from the EXPLORER-HCM trial. This trial compared mavacamten in combination with background therapy (BB and CCB) versus placebo, including oHCM patients (n = 251; mean age 59 years) in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classes II (72.9%) and III (27.1%). For the model, four health states were defined based on the NYHA classes, including NYHA I-NYHA III/IV and death. The model evaluated mavacamten with SoC versus SoC alone over a lifetime horizon with a cycle length of 4 weeks, following the most recent Dutch guidelines. Health state utilities and societal costs were derived from the AFFECT-HCM study, with utilities measured using the EQ-5D-5L. Outcomes included (incremental) societal costs, life years (LYs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The Dutch willingness-to-pay thresholds of €50,000 and €80,000 per QALY were applied. Uncertainty of parameters was assessed in deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity and scenario analyses.

resultsResults indicate mavacamten being more effective (Δ4.75 LYs; Δ3.36 QALYs) and more costly (Δ€235,951) compared with SoC with an ICER of €70,223 per QALY gained. Varying parameters by 20% showed that the utility value of patients in NYHA class I (ICER: €57,199; €111,506 per QALY) and drug costs (ICER: €53,985; €86,555 per QALY) were most sensitive. Mavacamten accumulated most LYs, QALYs and costs by patients improving to NYHA class I, compared with SoC, and patients remained longer in that state throughout the model. For men, incremental QALYs (Δ 3.36) and costs (Δ €239,743) were slightly higher compared with women. The probability of the intervention being cost effective at the willingness-to-pay thresholds €50,000 and €80,000 per QALY was 1.3% and 87.4%, respectively. Conclusion The results show that mavacamten increased LYs and QALYs compared with SoC, however, at substantial additional costs. The probability of mavacamten being cost effective depends on the selected willingness-to-pay threshold.