RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Cost-Effectiveness of Platelet Function Testing in Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Decision-Making after Intracranial Aneurysm Treatment with Flow Diversion
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2024.05.28.24308087
DO 10.1101/2024.05.28.24308087
A1 Wadhwa, Aryan
A1 Ramirez-Velandia, Felipe
A1 Mensah, Emmanuel
A1 Salih, Mira
A1 Enriquez-Marulanda, Alejandro
A1 Young, Michael
A1 Taussky, Philipp
A1 Ogilvy, Christopher S.
YR 2024
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2024/05/29/2024.05.28.24308087.abstract
AB Introduction Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) use is the standard of practice after flow diversion (FD) for intracranial aneurysms (IAs). Yet, no consensus exists in the literature regarding the optimal regimen. Certain institutions utilize various platelet function testing (PFT) to asses patient responsiveness to DAPT. Clopidogrel is the most commonly prescribed drug during DAPT, yet up to 52% of patients can be non-responders justifying PFT. Additionally, prices vary significantly among antiplatelet drugs, often further complicated by insurance restrictions. We aimed to determine the most cost-effective strategy for deciding DAPT regimens for patients after ICA treatment.Methods A decision tree with Monte Carlo simulations was performed to simulate patients undergoing various three-month postoperative DAPT regimens. Patients were either universally administered aspirin alongside Clopidogrel, Ticagrelor, or Prasugrel without PFT, or administered one of the former thienopyridine medications based on platelet reactivity unit (PRU) results after Clopidogrel. Input data for the model were extracted from the current literature, and the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) was defined as $100,000 per QALY as per standard practice in the US. The baseline comparison was with universal Clopidogrel DAPT without any PFT. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the model.Results PFT-Prasugrel was the most cost-effective regimen compared to universal Clopidogrel, with a base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $-35,255 (cost $2336.67, effectiveness 0.85). PFT-Ticagrelor (ICER $-4,671; cost $2,995.06, effectiveness 0.84), universal Prasugrel (ICER $5,553; cost $3,097.30, effectiveness 0.84), and universal Ticagrelor (ICER $75,969; cost $3,801.36, effectiveness 0.84) were all more cost-effective than treating patients with universal Clopidogrel (cost $3,041.77, effectiveness 0.83). These conclusions remain robust in probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses.Conclusion The most cost-effective strategy for DAPT after FD for intracranial aneurysms is administering PFT-Prasugrel alongside aspirin. The cost of PFT is strongly justified and recommended when deciding patient-specific DAPT regimens.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was receivedAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Exempt due to the nature of the data being publicly available and not relevant to patient-specific information.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesAll data in this manuscript was found from literature publicly available, and referenced in the manuscript.