Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 28, 2025

Testing the Efficacy of Pharmacological Agents in a Pericardial Target Delivery Model in the Swine
Published on: July 7, 2016
Cost effectiveness analyses of pharmacological treatments in heart failure
Audrey Huili Lim1, Nusaibah Abdul Rahim2, Jinxin Zhao3
1Institute for Clinical Research, National Institutes of Health, Shah Alam, Malaysia.
Insights
Newer heart failure drugs like SGLT2 inhibitors and vericiguat show cost-effectiveness, but real-world data is needed. Economic evaluations must consider country income levels for accurate analysis.
Area of Science:
- Pharmacoeconomics
- Cardiology
- Public Health
Background:
- Heart failure (HF) is a growing global public health concern with significant economic and societal costs.
- Current HF management includes traditional ACE inhibitors and beta-blockers, alongside newer agents like SGLT2 inhibitors, ivabradine, and vericiguat.
- Cost-effectiveness modeling is crucial for guiding clinical decisions in HF pharmacotherapy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review and evaluate evidence on the cost-effectiveness of recent HF pharmacotherapies.
- To identify gaps in current pharmacoeconomic research for novel HF drugs.
- To emphasize the importance of considering national income levels in cost-effectiveness analyses.
Main Methods:
- Literature review of cost-effectiveness studies for newer HF medications.
- Analysis of pharmacoeconomic data for SGLT2 inhibitors (dapagliflozin, empagliflozin), vericiguat, sacubitril/valsartan, ivabradine, and omecamtiv.
- Synthesis of findings considering clinical outcomes and economic thresholds.
Main Results:
- Dapagliflozin demonstrates cost-effectiveness for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
- Vericiguat shows cost-effectiveness, though potentially at a higher threshold than SGLT2 inhibitors, with limited real-world data on its use.
- Sacubitril/valsartan's cost-effectiveness is comparable to SGLT2 inhibitors but not established in all regions (e.g., Thailand, Singapore).
Conclusions:
- Novel HF drugs, including SGLT2 inhibitors and vericiguat, present promising cost-effectiveness profiles.
- Further research is needed on real-world utilization and comparative effectiveness of these agents.
- Accurate pharmacoeconomic assessments require tailoring to country-specific income levels and healthcare resource allocation.
Abstract:
In a rapidly growing and aging population, heart failure (HF) has become recognised as a public health concern that imposes high economic and societal costs worldwide. HF management stems from the use of highly cost-effective angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and β-blockers to the use of newer drugs such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), ivabradine, and vericiguat. Modelling studies of pharmacological treatments that report on cost effectiveness in HF is important in order to guide clinical decision making. Multiple cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) suggests that it is not only cost-effective and has the potential to improve long-term clinical outcomes, but is also likely to meet conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds in many countries. Similar promising results have also been shown for vericiguat while a cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) of empagliflozin has shown cost effectiveness in HF patients with Type 2 diabetes. Despite the recent FDA approval of dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in HF, it might take time for these SGLT2i to be widely used in real-world practice. A recent economic evaluation of vericiguat found it to be cost effective at a higher cost per QALY threshold than SGLT2i. However, there is a lack of clinical or real-world data regarding whether vericiguat would be prescribed on top of newer treatments or in lieu of them. Sacubitril/valsartan has been commonly compared to enalapril in cost effectiveness analysis and has been found to be similar to that of SGLT2i but was not considered a cost-effective treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in Thailand and Singapore with the current economic evaluation evidences. In order for more precise analysis on cost effectiveness analysis, it is necessary to take into account the income level of various countries as it is certainly easier to allocate more financial resources for the intervention, with greater effectiveness, in high- and middle-income countries than in low-income countries. This review aims to evaluate evidence and cost effectiveness studies in more recent HF drugs i.e., SGLT2i, ARNi, ivabradine, vericiguat and omecamtiv, and gaps in current literature on pharmacoeconomic studies in HF.
More Related Videos
05:16Cutoff Value of Phase Angle by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis at Admission as a Prognostic Factor in Patients with Acute Heart Failure
Published on: June 10, 2025
06:16Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Heart Failure Drugs: Inhibitors of Renin-Angiotensin System
Heart Failure Drugs: β-Blockers
Heart Failure VI: Adjunct Therapies
Dose-Response Relationship: Potency and Efficacy
Heart Failure Drugs: Diuretics