MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404611184 · doi:10.1080/13696998.2024.2431413

A US payer budget impact analysis of Flurpiridaz-PET-MPI compared to SPECT-MPI in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease

2024· article· en· W4404611184 on OpenAlexaff
Stacey Priest, Alicyia Walczyk Mooradally, Erika Szabó, Arturo Cabra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsEVERSANA (Canada)
FundersGE Healthcare
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseaseCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: This economic model was developed to assess the budget impact of a novel radiotracer, Flurpiridaz (F 18 -PET-MPI), compared to SPECT-MPI from a US payer perspective.Materials and Methods: The model was developed comparing F 18 -PET-MPI and SPECT-MPI, with F 18 -PET-MPI modality share increasing from 0.5% to 2.5% of the total MPI modality share, over a 5-year time horizon.The model estimates the impact of diagnostic performance on downstream healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) including invasive coronary angiography (ICA), revascularization, pharmacological treatment, and cardiac outcomes (CO) such as cardiac mortality (CM) and myocardial infarction (MI).Four suspected CAD populations, including general and difficult-to-image subgroups, were analyzed.Clinical inputs used to support the parameterization of the model were sourced from a systematic literature search and included claims-based real-world evidence, observational, and multicenter registry studies to inform the rates of HCRU and CO, and head-to-head comparative clinical trial data advised diagnostic performance inputs.Reimbursement codes informed MPI modality costs.Results are reported as per-member per-month (PMPM) based on a hypothetical health plan.Results: In all suspected CAD populations analyzed, there was a nominal cost increase in the world with F 18 -PET-MPI.The 5-year average PMPM incremental budget impact ranged from $0.02 to $0.05 across all suspected CAD subgroups.Cost-savings were associated with decreased downstream CO such as CM, MI, and ICA. Limitations and Conclusion:The available literature to source all parameters in the model was limited; therefore, assumptions and additional calculations were made based on published evidence to inform the model.A one-way sensitivity analysis was performed to confirm and address uncertainty in key parameters.This comprehensive analysis illustrates that the superior diagnostic performance of F 18 -PET-MPI may result in reduced adverse CO events and associated costs, increased appropriate identification and treatment of CAD, and a minimal increase in overall costs among general and difficult-to-image patient subgroups. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARYMyocardial perfusion imaging is a technique used to diagnose Coronary Artery Disease.Single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) are key Myocardial perfusion imaging functional heart assessments.This study compares the costs of Flurpiridaz-PET (a new PET radiotracer) to SPECT.Flurpiridaz-PET improves diagnostic accuracy, leading to better treatment and reduced cardiac outcomes, including fewer heart attacks and mortality.The overall cost difference between Flurpiridaz-PET and SPECT is minimal.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical EconomicsSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207