Ranolazine in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic angina: A cost-effectiveness analysis and assessment of health-related quality-of-life

Abstract

BackgroundType 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with a high burden of angina. Ranolazine has been shown to reduce angina frequency versus placebo in patients with T2D and stable angina. We sought to estimate the cost-effectiveness of ranolazine when added to standard-of-care (SoC) versus SoC alone in patients with T2D and stable, but symptomatic coronary disease despite treatment with 1–2 antianginals. MethodsA Markov model was developed and evaluated using cohort simulation. The model utilized a US societal perspective, 1-month cycle length and 1-year time horizon and was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of ranolazine versus SoC. Patients entered the model in 1 of 4 angina frequency health states based on baseline Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency scores (100 = no; 61–99 = monthly; 31–60 = weekly; 0–30 = daily) and could transition between health states (first cycle only) or to death (any cycle) based on probabilities derived from the Type 2 Diabetes Evaluation of Ranolazine in Subjects with Chronic Stable Angina trial. ResultsOur model estimated patients treated with ranolazine lived a mean of 0.728 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at a cost of $16,654. Those not receiving ranolazine lived a mean of 0.702 QALYs and incurred costs of $15,476. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the addition of ranolazine to SoC was $45,308/QALY. Short Form-36 data suggest improvements in patients' bodily pain drove the gain in QALYs associated with ranolazine (2.73 versus 3.96, p = 0.01). ConclusionOur model suggests the addition of ranolazine to SoC is likely cost–effective from a US societal perspective for the treatment of patients with T2D and stable, symptomatic coronary disease despite treatment with 1–2 antianginals.