Skip to main content

Table 5 One-way sensitivity analysis for ICER of rivaroxaban vs. VKA (acenocoumarol)

From: Economic evaluation of rivaroxaban in stroke prevention for patients with atrial fibrillation in Greece

 

Base case value

Low value

High Value

ICER/QALY gained low

ICER/QALY gained high

Acenocoumarol monitoring maintenance visits

3.00

1.00

5.00

€8,635

Riv. Dom.

Subsequent discontinuation rate riva

0.04

0.00

0.09

€7,630

Riv. Dom.

Utility decrement: stable on acenocoumarol therapy

0.95

0.92

1.00

Riv. Dom.

Riv. Dom.

Discontinuation rate riva

0.09

0.00

0.54

€390

Riv. Dom.

Subsequent discontinuation rate acenocoumarol

0.04

0.00

0.06

Riv. Dom.

€942

Discontinuation rate acenocoumarol

0.08

0.00

0.31

Riv. Dom.

€3311

Myocardial infarction RR for rivaroxaban

0.81

0.63

1.06

Riv. Dom.

Riv. Dom.

Rivaroxaban effectiveness

1.00

0.75

1.25

Riv. Dom.

Riv. Dom.

Stroke RR for riva

0.94

0.75

1.17

Riv. Dom.

Riv. Dom.

Acenocoumarol monitoring cost – follow

22.00

17.69

26.31

€228

Riv. Dom.

Acenocoumarol monitoring cost-initiation

32

25.73

38.27

Riv. Dom.

Riv. Dom.

Transport need (% of patients)

50%

0%

100%

€10,388

Riv. Dom.

Other therapy monitoring visits

0.25

0

1

Riv. Dom.

Riv. Dom.

  1. VKA vitamin-K-antagonist, Riv. Dom Rivaroxaban is dominant, ICER incremental cost effectiveness ratio, QALY quality-adjusted-life-year, RR Relative Risk.