Cost-Effectiveness of Eplerenone in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction after Myocardial InfarctionâAn Analysis of the EPHESUS Study from a Swiss Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The EPHESUS study demonstrated that aldosterone blockade with eplerenone decreased mortality in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and heart failure after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The EPHESUS pharmacoeconomic analysis was performed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of eplerenone in the Swiss setting. Materials and methods: A total of 6,632 patients with LVSD and heart failure after AMI were randomized to eplerenone or placebo and followed for a mean of 16months. The co-primary endpoints were all-cause death and the composite of cardiovascular death/cardiovascular hospitalization. The evaluation of resource use included hospitalizations, outpatient services, and medications. Survival beyond the trial period was estimated using data from the Framingham Heart Study, the Saskatchewan Health database, and the Worcester Heart Attack Registry. The incremental cost-effectiveness of eplerenone in cost per life-year and quality-adjusted life-year gained was estimated. The perspective of the Swiss third party payers was used. Daily treatment costs of eplerenone were set at CHF 3.88. All other resources were valued on the basis of official tariffs. Discounting of the results was performed at a rate of 3%. Results: The number of life-years gained with eplerenone was 0.1083 based on Framingham, 0.0661 with Saskatchewan and 0.1518 with Worcester survival estimates. Total costs were CHF 1,028 higher over the trial period in the eplerenone arm, due to drug cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was CHF 10,145 per life-year gained with Framingham, CHF 16,178 with Saskatchewan, and CHF 7,693 with Worcester survival estimates. The corresponding costs per QALY were CHF 15,219, CHF 23,965 and CHF 11,337, respectively. Conclusion: Eplerenone is effective in reducing mortality and, in Switzerland, is also cost-effective in increasing years of life for patients with LVSD after AMI
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".