http://jcps.bjmu.edu.cn

中国药学(英文版) ›› 2025, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (4): 370-384.DOI: 10.5246/jcps.2025.04.028

• 【研究论文】 • 上一篇    下一篇

单硝酸异山梨酯缓释胶囊对比单硝酸异山梨酯片剂治疗冠心病心绞痛的网状Meta分析与药物经济学评价

张慧1,2, 罗丹霞1,2, 周学兰1,2, 曾小芳1,2, 熊然1,2, 许业友1,2,*()   

  1. 1. 广东药科大学 医药商学院, 广东 广州 510006
    2. 广东药科大学 卫生经济与健康促进研究中心, 广东 广州 510006
  • 收稿日期:2024-11-08 修回日期:2025-02-27 接受日期:2025-03-06 出版日期:2025-05-02 发布日期:2025-05-02
  • 通讯作者: 许业友

Cost-effectiveness of sustained-release isosorbide mononitrate capsules for coronary heart disease: A network meta-analysis

Hui Zhang1,2, Danxia Luo1,2, Xuelan Zhou1,2, Xiaofang Zeng1,2, Ran Xiong1,2, Yeyou Xu1,2,*()   

  1. 1 School of Medical Business, Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong, China
    2 Guangdong Health Economics and Health Promotion Research Center, Guangzhou 510006, Guangdong, China
  • Received:2024-11-08 Revised:2025-02-27 Accepted:2025-03-06 Online:2025-05-02 Published:2025-05-02
  • Contact: Yeyou Xu
  • Supported by:
    The 2022 Ministry of Education General Project for Humanities and Social Sciences Research (Grant No. 22YJAZH147); the General Subject of Guangzhou Philosophy and Social Science Development "14th Five-Year Plan" in 2023 (Grant No. 2023GZYB68); China University Industry-Academia-Research Innovation Fund-Huatong Guokang Medical Research Special Project (Grant No. 2023HT017); 2024 Guangdong Province General Project for the Planning of Philosophy and Social Sciences (Grant No. GD24CGL29); the Innovation Team Project of Colleges and Universities in Guangdong Province (Grant No. 2022WCXTD011).

摘要:

不同的剂型的药物在体内具有不同的药代动力学, 可能引起不同的疗效和不良反应。本研究旨在评价单硝酸异山梨酯缓释胶囊(IMSRC)联合常规制剂与单硝酸异山梨酯片剂(IMT)联合常规制剂治疗冠心病心绞痛的有效性、安全性和经济性。采用网状Meta分析评价IMSRC和IMT的有效性和安全性。我们检索了PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、ScienceDirect、Web of Science、CNKI、Wanfang、VIP等自成立至2023年7月的相关文献。成本效果分析基于中国医疗体系的视角, 其中效果输入的数据来自网状Meta。共纳入15项研究。网状Meta结果显示, IMSRC加常规制剂与IMT加常规制剂的有效性和安全性无显著差异, 但均优于不加单硝酸异山梨酯的常规制剂。三组之间的安全性没有差异。然而, 根据网状Meta的SUCRA结果显示, IMT在心绞痛总有效率上略优于IMSRC, 而IMSRC心绞痛显著有效率和心电图有效率的概率均高于IMT。不良事件发生率依次为IMT > 常规制剂 > IMSRC。成本效果分析显示, 心绞痛显效率ICERs为–133.41, 总有效率为–260.20。心电图有效率ICERs分别为–83.34和–234.24。综上所述, IMSRC联合常规制剂与IMT联合常规制剂的疗效和安全性相似, 但前者更具经济性。

关键词: 单硝酸异山梨酯缓释胶囊, 网状Meta, 药物经济学, 冠心病

Abstract:

Different dosage forms can significantly impact pharmacokinetics in vivo, leading to varied effects and potential adverse reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of isosorbide mononitrate sustained-release capsules (IMSRC) combined with conventional treatments, compared to isosorbide mononitrate tablets (IMT) combined with conventional treatments, for managing angina pectoris in patients with coronary heart diseases. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of IMSRC and IMT. Relevant literature was sourced from databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP, covering publications up to July 2023. The cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed from the perspective of China’s healthcare system, utilizing inputs derived from the NMA. The analysis included 15 studies. The NMA results revealed no significant difference in efficacy and safety between IMSRC plus conventional treatments and IMT plus conventional treatments. However, both combinations were more effective than conventional treatments without isosorbide mononitrate. No differences in safety were observed among the three groups. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) of the NMA indicated that IMT had a slight edge over IMSRC in the total effective rate of angina pectoris, whereas IMSRC showed higher probabilities for markedly effective rate and ECG effective rate compared to IMT. The incidence of adverse events was ranked as IMT > conventional preparation > IMSRC. The CEA results highlighted that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the markedly effective and total effective rates of angina pectoris were –133.41 and –260.20, respectively. The ICERs for ECG effective rates were –83.34 and –234.24, respectively. In conclusion, while IMSRC combined with conventional treatments and IMT combined with conventional treatments were similar in efficacy and safety, IMSRC proved to be more economical.

Key words: Isosorbide mononitrate sustained-release capsules, Network meta-analysis, Cost-effectiveness, Coronary heart disease

Supporting: /attached/file/20250504/20250504143422_81.pdf