Cost-Effectiveness of Alirocumab: A Just-in-Time Analysis Based on the ODYSSEY Outcomes Trial
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: The ODYSSEY Outcomes (Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes After an Acute Coronary Syndrome During Treatment With Alirocumab) trial included participants with a recent acute coronary syndrome. Compared with participants receiving statins alone, those receiving a statin plus alirocumab had lower rates of a composite outcome including myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and death.
Objective: To determine the cost-effectiveness of alirocumab in these circumstances.
Design: Decision analysis using the Cardiovascular Disease Policy Model.
Data Sources: Data sources representative of the United States combined with data from the ODYSSEY Outcomes trial.
Target Population: U.S. adults with a recent first MI and a baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 1.81 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) or greater.
Time Horizon: Lifetime.
Perspective: U.S. health system.
Intervention: Alirocumab or ezetimibe added to statin therapy.
Outcome Measures: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in 2018 U.S. dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.
Results Of Base-case Analysis: Compared with a statin alone, the addition of ezetimibe cost $81 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], $51 000 to $215 000) per QALY. Compared with a statin alone, the addition of alirocumab cost $308 000 (UI, $197 000 to $678 000) per QALY. Compared with the combination of statin and ezetimibe, replacing ezetimibe with alirocumab cost $997 000 (UI, $254 000 to dominated) per QALY.
Results Of Sensitivity Analysis: The price of alirocumab would have to decrease from its original cost of $14 560 to $1974 annually to be cost-effective relative to ezetimibe.
Limitation: Effectiveness estimates were based on a single randomized trial with a median follow-up of 2.8 years and should not be extrapolated to patients with stable coronary heart disease.
Conclusion: The price of alirocumab would have to be reduced considerably to be cost-effective. Because substantial reductions already have occurred, we believe that timely, independent cost-effectiveness analyses can inform clinical and policy discussions of new drugs as they enter the market.
Primary Funding Source: University of California, San Francisco, and Institute for Clinical and Economic Review.
Volpp K, Mahraj K, Norton L, Asch D, Glanz K, Mehta S Am Heart J. 2024; 278():208-222.
PMID: 39341482 PMC: 11560706. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2024.09.029.
Sasidharan A, Bagepally B, Sajith Kumar S, Jagadeesh K, Natarajan M PLoS One. 2022; 17(6):e0264563.
PMID: 35709152 PMC: 9202874. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0264563.
Desai N, Campbell C, Electricwala B, Petrou M, Trueman D, Woodcock F Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2022; 22(5):545-556.
PMID: 35595929 PMC: 9468070. DOI: 10.1007/s40256-022-00534-9.
[Cost-benefit analysis of new lipid-lowering agents].
Blaum C, Arnold N, Waldeyer C Herz. 2022; 47(3):236-243.
PMID: 35467096 DOI: 10.1007/s00059-022-05116-8.
Weintraub W, Bhatt D, Zhang Z, Dolman S, Boden W, Bress A JAMA Netw Open. 2022; 5(2):e2148172.
PMID: 35157055 PMC: 8844997. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.48172.