Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of B-type natriuretic peptide-guided care in patients with heart failure

BMJ Open. 2016 Dec 28;6(12):e014010. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014010.

Abstract

Objective: Monitoring B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) to guide pharmacotherapy might improve survival in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) or preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, the cost-effectiveness of BNP-guided care is uncertain and guidelines do not uniformly recommend it. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of BNP-guided care in patient subgroups defined by age and ejection fraction.

Methods: We used a Markov model with a 3-month cycle length to estimate the lifetime health service costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental net monetary benefits (iNMBs) of BNP-guided versus clinically guided care in 3 patient subgroups: (1) HFrEF patients <75 years; (2) HFpEF patients <75 years; and (3) HFrEF patients ≥75 years. There is no evidence of benefit in patients with HFpEF aged ≥75 years. We used individual patient data meta-analyses and linked primary care, hospital and mortality data to inform the key model parameters. We performed probabilistic analysis to assess the uncertainty in model results.

Results: In younger patients (<75 years) with HFrEF, the mean QALYs (5.57 vs 5.02) and costs (£63 527 vs £58 139) were higher with BNP-guided care. At the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20 000 per QALY, the positive iNMB (£5424 (95% CI £987 to £9469)) indicates that BNP-guided care is cost-effective in this subgroup. The evidence of cost-effectiveness of BNP-guided care is less strong for younger patients with HFpEF (£3155 (-£10 307 to £11 613)) and older patients (≥75 years) with HFrEF (£2267 (-£1524 to £6074)). BNP-guided care remained cost-effective in the sensitivity analyses, albeit the results were sensitive to assumptions on its sustained effect.

Conclusions: We found strong evidence that BNP-guided care is a cost-effective alternative to clinically guided care in younger patients with HFrEF. It is potentially cost-effective in younger patients with HFpEF and older patients with HFrEF, but more evidence is required, particularly with respect to the frequency, duration and BNP target for monitoring. Cost-effectiveness results from trials in specialist settings cannot be generalised to primary care.

Keywords: B-type natriuretic peptide; Cost-effectiveness; Markov model; Survival analysis.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Age Factors
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Cardiovascular Agents / therapeutic use*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis*
  • Female
  • Health Care Costs*
  • Heart Failure / drug therapy*
  • Heart Failure / economics
  • Heart Failure / metabolism
  • Heart Failure / physiopathology
  • Hospitalization
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Markov Chains
  • Natriuretic Peptide, Brain / metabolism*
  • Patient Care / economics
  • Patient Care / methods*
  • Primary Health Care
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years*
  • Stroke Volume

Substances

  • Cardiovascular Agents
  • Natriuretic Peptide, Brain