Analysis of Cost-effectiveness and Budget Impact of Anticoagulants in the Treatment of Deep Venous Thrombosis in Oncology Patients
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32635/2176-9745.RBC.2019v65n3.295Keywords:
Economics, Pharmaceutical, Neoplasms, Venous Thrombosis, Anticoagulants, Unified Health SystemAbstract
Objective: The study analyzed the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of rivaroxaban versus enoxaparin. Method: This is a retrospective cohort, performed with oncological population from the perspective of the Sistema Único de Saúde (National Health System). The decision tree model compared outcomes of bleeding and retromosis, and costs of treatment of deep venous thrombosis with rivaroxaban or enoxaparin in a time horizon of seven months. Direct costs were extracted from the SIGTAP-SUS, and the Brazilian Spreadsheet for Budgetary Impact of Health Technologies was used to evaluate the Budgetary Impact based in the Brazilian population of 2017 over a five-year period. The sensitivity analysis simulated scenarios for both cost-effectiveness and budget impact assessments. Results: One hundred and fifty-three patients were included in the cost-effectiveness analysis with several neoplasms. Rivaroxaban demonstrated no therapeutic inferiority compared to enoxaparin. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was R$ 5,521.71 per benefit unit spared with the new alternative, rivaroxaban. In the sensitivity analysis, rivaroxaban remained dominant. An economy in incremental budget impact of R$ 85,950,791,129.21 was demonstrated with the use of rivaroxaban over five years in comparison to the reference scenario, and this continued as the most economic option in relation to sensitivity analyzes. Conclusion: In this context rivaroxaban was an important therapeutic alternative.