Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Patiromer and Spironolactone Therapy in Heart Failure Patients with Hyperkalemia

Mark Bounthavong, Javed Butler, Chantal M. Dolan, Jeffrey D. Dunn, Kathryn A. Fisher, Nina Oestreicher, Bertram Pitt, Paul J. Hauptman and David L. Veenstra ()
Additional contact information
Mark Bounthavong: University of Washington
Javed Butler: Stony Brook University
Chantal M. Dolan: CMD Consulting
Jeffrey D. Dunn: Magellan Rx
Kathryn A. Fisher: CMD Consulting
Nina Oestreicher: Relypsa, Inc., a Vifor Pharma Group Company
Bertram Pitt: University of Michigan School of Medicine
Paul J. Hauptman: Saint Louis University School of Medicine
David L. Veenstra: University of Washington

PharmacoEconomics, 2018, vol. 36, issue 12, No 8, 1463-1473

Abstract: Abstract Background and Objective Certain patients with heart failure (HF) are unable to tolerate spironolactone therapy due to hyperkalemia. Patiromer is a novel agent used to treat hyperkalemia and has been shown to be efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated. The potential clinical outcomes and economic value of using patiromer and spironolactone in patients with HF unable to otherwise tolerate spironolactone due to hyperkalemia are unclear. The objective of this analysis was to model the potential pharmacoeconomic value of using patiromer and spironolactone in patients with a history of hyperkalemia that prevents them from utilizing spironolactone. Methods We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of treatment with patiromer, spironolactone, and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI) in patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III–IV HF compared with ACEI alone. A Markov model was constructed to simulate a cohort of 65-year-old patients diagnosed with HF from the payer perspective across the lifetime horizon. Clinical inputs were derived from the RALES and OPAL-HK randomized trials of spironolactone and patiromer, respectively. Utility estimates and costs were derived from the literature and list prices. Outcomes assessed included hospitalization, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probability sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model findings. Results Treatment with patiromer–spironolactone–ACEI was projected to increase longevity compared with ACEI alone (5.29 vs. 4.62 life-years gained, respectively), greater QALYs (2.79 vs. 2.60), and costs (US$28,200 vs. US$18,200), giving an ICER of US$52,700 per QALY gained. The ICERs ranged from US$40,000 to US$85,800 per QALY gained in 1-way sensitivity analyses. Conclusion Our results suggest that the use of spironolactone–patiromer–ACEI may provide clinical benefit and good economic value in patients with NYHA class III–IV HF unable to tolerate spironolactone due to hyperkalemia.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-018-0709-3 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharme:v:36:y:2018:i:12:d:10.1007_s40273-018-0709-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0709-3

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().