Clin Ther. 2023 Apr 21:S0149-2918(23)00131-5. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2023.04.004. Online ahead of print.
PURPOSE: Ranolazine is used to treat stable angina pectoris, the most common symptom of ischemic heart disease. Appropriate management of chronic stable angina pectoris is essential from both a clinical and an economic view point.
METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We included cost-utility analyses, which compared ranolazine with other standard treatments for treating stable angina pectoris. The search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases. A random-effects model based on the DerSimonian and Laird method was used to pool the incremental net benefit reported in purchasing power parity adjusted US dollars. The modified economic evaluation checklist was used to assess the risk of bias.
FINDINGS: The pooled results from 7 selected studies with a time horizon of 1 year show that add-on ranolazine was significantly cost-effective compared with standard treatment, with a pooled incremental net benefit of US$1335 (95% CI, 500 to 2169) but with substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 79.46%). On subgroup analysis, ranolazine was cost-effective from the payers' perspective (US$1975; 95% CI, 1042 to 2908; I2 = 69.23) but not from a societal perspective (US$297; 95% CI, -241 to 715; I2 = 0%)]. There was limited evidence from lower economies.
IMPLICATIONS: Pooled evidence suggests that add-on ranolazine therapy is cost-effective for chronic stable angina pectoris up to a 1-year time horizon. There is a lacuna of evidence from low- and middle-income countries and on long-term cost-effectiveness. The current evidence synthesis may provide a macroeconomic point of view for policy makers regarding the direction of ranolazine's cost-effectiveness for evidence-informed policy-making. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022332454.
PMID:37087299 | DOI:10.1016/j.clinthera.2023.04.004