+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a cost-effectiveness analysis



Apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban versus warfarin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a cost-effectiveness analysis



Clinical Drug Investigation 34(1): 9-17



Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) increases the risk of systemic thromboembolic events; therefore, anticoagulant treatment with vitamin K antagonists is widely prescribed. Recently, new oral anticoagulants (NOAs) directly inhibiting thrombin (dabigatran) or factor Xa (rivaroxaban and apixaban) demonstrated their non-inferiority with respect to warfarin in reducing the thromboembolic risk. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost effectiveness of NOAs in an Italian setting. A Markov decision model including ten health states and death was developed, and a 3-month Markov cycle and lifetime horizon were adopted. Transition probabilities and quality of life were estimated from three randomized trials and from additional reports in the literature. Analysis was performed in the context of the Italian National Health System. First- and second-order sensitivity analyses were made to test the robustness of the results. The mean European cost of dabigatran (2.58/day) was assigned to each NOA. The incremental cost-utility ratio was below 25,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for each NOA and each CHADS2 level, but differences among drugs were found. This result was sensitive to the time in (warfarin) therapeutic range and time horizon. Our analysis suggests that NOAs are a cost-effective treatment for the prevention of stroke in patients with NVAF in the Italian healthcare setting.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 051600687

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 24135964

DOI: 10.1007/s40261-013-0144-3


Related references

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Apixaban, Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Warfarin for Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation in Taiwan. Clinical Drug Investigation 37(3): 285-293, 2017

Cost-effectiveness of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Stroke 44(6): 1676-1681, 2013

Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation in France: comparative cost-effectiveness of new oral anticoagulants (apixaban, dabigatran, and rivaroxaban), warfarin, and aspirin. Journal of Medical Economics 17(8): 587-598, 2014

Cost-effectiveness analysis of dabigatran versus rivaroxaban for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation using real-world evidence in elderly US Medicare beneficiaries. Current Medical Research and Opinion 34(1): 55-63, 2018

Cost Effectiveness Evaluation Of Apixaban, Dabigatran Rivaroxaban And Warfarin For Prevention Of Tromboembolism In Patients With Atrial Fibrillation In Trinidad And Tobago. Value in Health 17(3): A116-A117, 2014

Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban, Dabigatran, and Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation and Previous Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack. Stroke 48(8): 2142-2149, 2017

Cost-effectiveness of dabigatran and rivaroxaban compared with warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy 28(6): 575-585, 2014

Economic evaluation of warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and apixaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Pharmacoeconomics 32(6): 601-612, 2014

Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran, Rivaroxaban, and Apixaban Versus Warfarin in Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation. Journal of the American Heart Association 5(6):, 2016

Comparison of cost-effectiveness of anticoagulation with dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation across countries. Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 37(4): 507-523, 2014

Cost Effectiveness Analysis Of Apixaban Versus Other Noacs For The Prevention Of Stroke In Italian Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Patients. Value in Health 17(7): A487, 2014

Effectiveness and Safety of Apixaban, Dabigatran, and Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in Frail Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation. Journal of the American Heart Association 7(8):, 2018

Cost-effectiveness analysis of apixaban versus acetylsalicylic acid in the prevention of stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in Spain. Atencion Primaria 48(6): 394-405, 2016

A comparative analysis of models used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran versus warfarin for the prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation. Pharmacoeconomics 31(7): 589-604, 2013

Edoxaban versus warfarin for stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis 39(2): 149-154, 2015