Apixaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in people ...

5.2 Summary and critique of manufacturer’s submitted economic evaluation by the
ERG
Summarise and critique the cost effectiveness evidence submitted by the manufacturer
(headings 5.2.1 to 5.2.11 are suggested headings). It is noted that the ERGs may prefer NOT
to combine the summary and critique of the submitted economic evidence and instead report
summary and critique sections separately.
Summarise and critique the cost effectiveness evidence submitted by the manufacturer
(headings 5.2.1 to 5.2.11 are suggested headings). It is noted that the ERGs may prefer NOT
to combine the summary and critique of the submitted economic evidence and instead report
summary and critique sections separately.
5.2.1 NICE reference case checklist (TABLE ONLY)
Elements of the
economic evaluation
Reference Case Included
in
submissio
Comparator(s) Therapies routinely used in the
NHS, including technologies
regarded as current best practice
36
n
Comment on whether de-novo
evaluation meets requirements
of NICE reference case
Yes Comparison with fondaparinux
was deemed not possible by
manufacturer because data were
lacking. Upon request by the
ERG, fondaparinux was included
as a comparator in the analysis of
THR. Also, upon request a full
incremental cost-effectiveness
analysis on both TKR and THR
was provided
Type of economic
evaluation
Cost-effectiveness analysis Yes
Perspective on costs NHS and PSS Yes No significant PSS costs were
identified
Perspective on
outcomes
All health effects on individuals Yes
Time horizon Sufficient to capture differences in Yes At a maximum 60 years, at which
costs and outcomes
moment 99.99% of the population
has died
Synthesis of evidence on
outcomes
Systematic review Yes
Measure of health
effects
QALYs Yes
Source of data for Reported directly by patients and/or Yes HRQoL was reported by patients,
measurement of HRQL carers
but from different populations
Source of preference Representative sample of the public Yes / No Some health states were valued
data for valuation of
by a representative sample of the
changes in HRQL
public, others were valued by
patients
Discount rate Annual rate of 3.5% on both costs
and health effects
Yes
Equity weighting An additional QALY has the same
weight regardless of the other
characteristics of the individuals
receiving the health benefit
Yes
Sensitivity analysis Probabilistic sensitivity analysis Yes Not for all parameters but only
those not included in the one way
sensitivity analysis
Copyright 2011 Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO. All rights reserved.