Cost-Effectiveness of Prasugrel Versus Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes and Planned Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Results From the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction

Background—In patients with acute coronary syndromes and planned percutaneous coronary intervention, the Trial to Assess Improvement in Therapeutic Outcomes by Optimizing Platelet Inhibition With Prasugrel–Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38 (TRITON-TIMI 38) demonstrated that treatment with prasugrel versus clopidogrel was associated with reduced rates of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke and an increased risk of major bleeding. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of prasugrel versus clopidogrel from the perspective of the US healthcare system by using data from TRITON-TIMI 38. Methods and Results—Detailed resource use data were prospectively collected for all patients recruited from 8 countries (United States, Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom, and France; n 3373 prasugrel, n 3332 clopidogrel). Hospitalization costs were estimated on the basis of diagnosis-related group and in-hospital complications. Cardiovascular medication costs were estimated by using net wholesale prices (clopidogrel $4.62/d; prasugrel $5.45/d). Life expectancy was estimated from in-trial cardiovascular and bleeding events with the use of statistical models of long-term survival from a similar population from the Saskatchewan Health Database. Over a median follow-up of 14.7 months, average total costs (including study drug) were $221 per patient lower with prasugrel (95% confidence interval, 759 to 299), largely because of a lower rate of rehospitalization involving percutaneous coronary intervention. Prasugrel was associated with life expectancy gains of 0.102 years (95% confidence interval, 0.030 to 0.180), primarily because of the decreased rate of nonfatal MI. Thus, compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel was an economically dominant treatment strategy. If a hypothetical generic cost for clopidogrel of $1/d is used, the incremental net cost with prasugrel was $996 per patient, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $9727 per life-year gained. Conclusion—Among acute coronary syndrome patients with planned percutaneous coronary intervention, treatment with prasugrel versus clopidogrel for up to 15 months is an economically attractive treatment strategy. Clinical Trial Registration—clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00097591. (Circulation. 2010;121:71-79.)