Comparison of the two-year outcomes and costs of prophylaxis in medical patients at risk of venous thromboembolism

Summary

A decision-analytic model incorporating a Markov process to assess the incremental cost and effectiveness of venous throm-boembolism (VTE) prevention strategies was used. Modeling was carried out using a hypothetical cohort of medical patients at risk of VTE.The model compared clinical effectiveness (primary and recurrent VTE, death), safety (adverse events), and direct medical costs between patients receiving enoxaparin prophylaxis, unfractionated heparin (UFH) prophylaxis, and no prophylaxis (n=10,000 for each arm). Monte Carlo simulation was performed to identify changes in inputs that would affect the results.The estimated incidence of VTE at two years (including recurrentVTE) was 6.8% with enoxaparin prophylaxis, 7.9% with UFH prophylaxis,and 17.9% with no prophylaxis.Two-year mortality occurred in 15.7% of enoxaparin patients and 16.0% of UFH patients, with the incidences of major bleeding in these groups being 0.7% and 1.2%, respectively. However, both enoxaparin and UFH prophylaxis were associated with higher rates of major bleeds than no prophylaxis (0.6%).Total average costs per patient were (US dollars) $1,264 (for enoxaparin prophylaxis, $1,585 for UFH prophylaxis,and $2,245 for no prophylaxis).No realistic parameter changes resulted in enoxaparin prophylaxis being more costly than UFH prophylaxis. For the healthcare payer, considering all direct medical costs associated with VTE up to two years after an admission for acute illness, prophylaxis with enoxaparin was more effective and less costly than UFH. This identifies enoxaparin as a potentially favorable VTE prophylaxis regimen compared with UFH and no prophylaxis in at-risk medical patients

Keywords

Medical costs - venous thromboembolism - prophylaxis

• References

• 1 Heit JA, Cohen AT, Anderson Jr FA. et al. Estimated annual number of incident and recurrent, non-fatal and fatal venous thromboembolism (VTE) events in the US. Blood. 2005 106. Abstract 910.
• 2 Geerts WH, Pineo GF, Heit JA. et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest 2004; 126 (Suppl. 03) 338S-400S.
• 3 Leapfrog Group. Informing choices, rewarding excellence, getting healthcare right. Washington DC (USA: Available at: http://www.leapfroggroup.org Accessed March 25 2008
• 4 Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY. et al. A comparison of enoxaparin with placebo for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients Prophylaxis in Medical Patients with Enoxaparin Study Group. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 793-800.
• 5 Shorr AF, Jackson WL, Sherner JH. et al. Differences between low-molecular-weight and unfractionated heparin for venous thromboembolism prevention following ischemic stroke: a metaanalysis. Chest 2008; 133: 149-155.
• 6 Hull RD, Schellong SM, Tapson VF. et al. Extended-duration venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients with recent reduced mobility: The EXCLAIM study. J Thromb Haemost. 2007 05. (Suppl 2): O-S-001.
• 7 Amin A, Stemkowski S, Lin J, Yang G. Thromboprophylaxis rates in US medical centers: success or failure?. J Thromb Haemost 2007; 05: 1610-1616.
• 8 Cohn SL, Adekile A, Mahabir V. Improved use of thromboprophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis following an educational intervention. J Hosp Med 2006; 01: 331-338.
• 9 de Lissovoy G, Subedi P. Economic evaluation of enoxaparin as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in seriously ill medical patients: a US perspective. Am J Manag Care 2002; 08: 1082-1088.
• 10 McGarry LJ, Thompson D, Weinstein MC. et al. Cost effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis with a low-molecular-weight heparin versus unfractionated heparin in acutely ill medical inpatients. Am J Manag Care 2004; 10: 632-642.
• 11 Offord R, Lloyd AC, Anderson P. et al. Economic evaluation of enoxaparin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in acutely ill medical patients. Pharm World Sci 2004; 26: 214-220.
• 12 Leykum L, Pugh J, Diuguid D. et al. Cost utility of substituting enoxaparin for unfractionated heparin for prophylaxis of venous thrombosis in the hospitalized medical patient. J Hosp Med 2006; 01: 168-176.
• 13 Heit JA, Mohr DN, Silverstein MD. et al. Predictors of recurrence after deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a population-based cohort study. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 761-768.
• 14 White RH, Zhou H, Kim J. et al. A population-based study of the effectiveness of inferior vena cava filter use among patients with venous thromboembolism. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 2033-2041.
• 15 Mismetti P, Laporte-Simitsidis S, Tardy B. et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in internal medicine with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparins: a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Thromb Haemost 2000; 83: 14-19.
• 16 Edelsberg J, Hagiwara M, Taneja C. et al. Risk of venous thromboembolism among hospitalized medically ill patients. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006; 63 (20) (Suppl. 06) S16-S22.
• 17 United States Life Tables. 2002 US Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics.
• 18 Stein PD, Woodard PK, Hull RD. et al. Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography for detection of acute pulmonary embolism: an in-depth review. Chest 2003; 124: 2324-2328.
• 19 Prandoni P, Lensing AW, Cogo A. et al. The long-term clinical course of acute deep venous thrombosis. Ann Intern Med 1996; 125: 1-7.
• 20 Murin S, Romano PS, White RH. Comparison of outcomes after hospitalization for deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost 2002; 88: 407-414.
• 21 Prandoni P, Villalta S, Bagatella P. et al. The clinical course of deep-vein thrombosis. Prospective long-term follow-upof528 symptomatic patients.Haematologica 1997; 82: 423-428.
• 22 Pengo V, Lensing AW, Prins MH. et al. Incidence of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension after pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 2257-2264.
• 23 Staff PDR. 2006. Redbook: Pharmacy’s Fundamental Reference. Thomson PDR; Rev. Ed edition. May 2006
• 24 Zhao L, Ewen E, Zhang Z. et al. Cost and cost-effectiveness of intravenous enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in elective percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the STEEPLE trial. Circulation 2006; 114 (Suppl II): Abstract 3858 3858.
• 25 Medicare Payment Schedule. 2005 US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
• 26 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule. 2005 US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
• 27 Creekmore FM, Oderda GM, Pendleton RC. et al. Incidence and economic implications of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia in medical patients receiving prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism. Pharmacotherapy 2006; 26: 1438-1445.
• 28 Spyropoulos A. Direct medical costs of venous thromboembolism and subsequent hospital readmission rates: an administrative claims analysis from 30 managed care organizations. J Manag Care Pharm 2007; 13: 475-486.
• 29 MacDougall DA, Feliu AL, Boccuzzi SJ. et al. Economic burden of deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and post-thrombotic syndrome. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006; 63 (20) (Suppl. 06) S5-S15.
• 30 Burleigh E, Wang C, Foster D. et al. Thromboprophylaxis in medically ill patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006; 63 (20) (Suppl. 06) S23-S29.
• 31 Wade WE, Spruill WJ. Cost comparison of tinzaparin versus enoxaparin as deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in spinal cord injury: preliminary data. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2001; 12: 619-625.
• 32 Johnston JA, Brill-Edwards P, Ginsberg JS. et al. Cost-effectiveness of prophylactic low molecular weight heparin in pregnant women with a prior history of venous thromboembolism. AmJMed 2005; 118: 503-514.
• 33 Shorr AF, Jackson WL, Weiss BM. et al. Low-molecular weight heparin for deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients: results from a cost-effectiveness analysis. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis 2007; 18: 309-316.
• 34 Sherman DG, Albers GW, Bladin C. et al. The efficacy and safety of enoxaparin versus unfractionated he-parin for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after acute ischaemic stroke (PREV A IL Study): an open-label randomised comparison. Lancet 2007; 369: 1347-1355.