Cost-effectiveness of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the brazilian case with bayesian networks and markov influence diagrams

L S F Carvalho,C Koeche,Y Botelho,A L Bertuol,A V Nunes,M G S Oliveira,L Dourado,J Andrade,A Magno,A Pacheco,A C C Nogueira,A J B A Guimaraes,A C Sposito,M D Fernandez,M Pfitzner
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.3622
IF: 39.3
2024-10-30
European Heart Journal
Abstract:Background Heart failure (HF) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, with a significant burden in middle-income countries, such as Brazil. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been established as a cornerstone in the treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), but their adoption has faced obstacles. Until recently, spironolactone was the only MRA available in Brazil, with restricted use due to associated side effects, such as gynecomastia and hyperkalemia. However, the introduction of new MRAs, such as finerenone and eplerenone, has the potential to change the therapeutic landscape. Understanding the cost-effectiveness of these agents in the Brazilian healthcare context is essential to optimize HF management. Methods A Bayesian Network approach complemented by Markov Influence Diagrams was employed to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), presented in international dollars (Int . Results The NMA highlighted that spironolactone [HR:0.75 (95%CI 0.67-0.84)], eplerenone [HR:0.84 (95%CI 0.77-0.93)] and finerenone [HR:0.90 (95%CI 0.82-0.98)] significantly reduced the relative risk of all-cause mortality compared to no MRA utilization. Notably, eplerenone significantly reduced hospitalizations due to HF [HR:0.60 (95%CI 0.41-0.90)] compared to no MRA therapy, with spironolactone and finerenone showing HRs of 0.68 (95%CI 0.40-1.17) and 0.83 (95%CI 0.59-1.15) . The analysis also revealed a notably higher risk of MRA discontinuation for finerenone (22%) and spironolactone (51%) compared to eplerenone. In cost-effectiveness comparisons, finerenone was dominated by alternatives, while eplerenone exhibited an ICER of Int 8,900 per QALY. Conclusions In the Brazilian healthcare context, eplerenone will likely be the most cost-effective MRA compared to spironolactone, offering both a reduction in HF-related hospitalizations and a lower discontinuation rate. These findings underscore the value of integrating cost-effectiveness analyzes into healthcare decision-making processes.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems
What problem does this paper attempt to address?