The cost-effectiveness of an early interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome based on the RITA 3 trial

Background: Evidence suggests that an early interventional strategy for patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) can improve health outcomes but also increase costs when compared with a conservative strategy. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of an early interventional strategy in different risk groups from a UK health-service perspective. Design: Decision-analytic model based on randomised clinical trial data. Main outcome measures: Costs in UK Sterling at 2003/2004 prices and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) combined into an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Methods: Data from the third Randomised Intervention Trial of unstable Angina (RITA 3) was employed to estimate rates of cardiovascular death and myocardial infarction, costs and health-related quality of life. Cost-effectiveness was estimated over patients’ lifetimes within the decision-analytic model. Results: The mean incremental cost per QALY gained for an early interventional strategy was approximately £55 000, £22 000 and £12 000 for patients at low, intermediate and high risk, respectively. The early interventional strategy is approximately 1%, 35% and 95% likely to be cost-effective for patients at low, intermediate and high risk, respectively, at a threshold of £20 000 per QALY. The cost-effectiveness of early intervention in low-risk patients is sensitive to assumptions about the duration of the treatment effect. Conclusion: An early interventional strategy in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS is likely to be considered cost-effective for patients at high and intermediate risk, but this is less likely to be the case for patients at low risk.

[1]  Mark J Sculpher,et al.  Costs of an early intervention versus a conservative strategy in acute coronary syndrome. , 2008, International journal of cardiology.

[2]  Andrew Briggs,et al.  Cost effectiveness of perindopril in reducing cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary artery disease using data from the EUROPA study , 2006, Heart.

[3]  Milan K. Gupta,et al.  ACE inhibitors: back to prime time? , 2007, Heart.

[4]  Andrew Briggs,et al.  Lifetime cost effectiveness of simvastatin in a range of risk groups and age groups derived from a randomised trial of 20 536 people , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  L. Wallentin,et al.  5-year outcomes in the FRISC-II randomised trial of an invasive versus a non-invasive strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a follow-up study , 2006, The Lancet.

[6]  J. Tijssen,et al.  Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  P. Poole‐Wilson,et al.  5-year outcome of an interventional strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial , 2005, The Lancet.

[8]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. , 2005, JAMA.

[9]  Mark J Sculpher,et al.  Health-related quality of life after interventional or conservative strategy in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: one-year results of the third Randomized Intervention Trial of unstable Angina (RITA-3). , 2005, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  M. Janzon Treatment strategies in unstable coronary artery disease : economic and quality of life evaluations , 2003 .

[11]  C. Cannon,et al.  Cost and cost-effectiveness of an early invasive vs conservative strategy for the treatment of unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. , 2002, JAMA.

[12]  K. Fox,et al.  Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial , 2002, The Lancet.

[13]  M. Drummond,et al.  A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute For Clinical Excellence (NICE) , 2002, The Lancet.

[14]  P. Widimsky,et al.  Value of first day angiography/angioplasty in evolving non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: an open multicenter randomized trial. The VINO study☆ , 2002 .

[15]  R. Taylor,et al.  NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EXCELLENCE (NICE) , 2002, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[16]  P. Widimsky,et al.  Value of first day angiography/angioplasty in evolving Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: an open multicenter randomized trial. The VINO Study. , 2002, European heart journal.

[17]  L. Levin,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of an invasive strategy in unstable coronary artery disease; results from the FRISC II invasive trial. The Fast Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery disease. , 2002, European heart journal.

[18]  C. Vassanelli,et al.  [Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban]. , 2001, Italian heart journal. Supplement : official journal of the Italian Federation of Cardiology.

[19]  K Claxton,et al.  The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. , 1999, Journal of health economics.

[20]  R. Kleiger,et al.  Outcomes in patients with acute non-Q-wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned to an invasive as compared with a conservative management strategy. Veterans Affairs Non-Q-Wave Infarction Strategies in Hospital (VANQWISH) Trial Investigators. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  W. O’Neill,et al.  A prospective randomized trial of triage angiography in acute coronary syndromes ineligible for thrombolytic therapy. Results of the medicine versus angiography in thrombolytic exclusion (MATE) trial. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  R. Kleiger,et al.  Correction: Outcomes in Patients with Acute Non-Q-Wave Myocardial Infarction Randomly Assigned to an Invasive as Compared with a Conservative Management Strategy. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  P. Dolan,et al.  Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. , 1997, Medical care.

[24]  R. Brooks EuroQol: the current state of play. , 1996, Health policy.

[25]  C. Cannon,et al.  One-year results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) IIIB clinical trial. A randomized comparison of tissue-type plasminogen activator versus placebo and early invasive versus early conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q wave myocardial infarction. , 1995, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  D. Collet Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research , 2004 .

[27]  D. Collett Modelling Survival Data in Medical Research , 1994 .

[28]  M Johannesson,et al.  On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis. , 1993, Journal of health economics.