{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016317016317016316, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011655011655011656, 'mean_word_length': 5.472361809045226, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cost-effectiveness of using CYP2C19 genotype to guide selection of clopidogrel or ticagrelor in Australia.

AIMS
This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness in Australia of screening CYP2C19 loss-of-function (LoF) alleles to guide selection of clopidogrel or ticagrelor for individuals with acute coronary syndrome who are likely to undergo coronary stenting.


METHODS
Three treatment strategies were compared: universal clopidogrel therapy, universal ticagrelor therapy and genotyping CYP2C19 with use of ticagrelor for individuals with a LoF allele and clopidogrel for individuals without a LoF allele. Lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years for each treatment strategy were estimated using a Markov model. The risks of events were primarily derived from the genetic substudy of the pivotal randomized controlled trial.


RESULTS
CYP2C19 genotyping resulted in greater effectiveness and was cost-effective when compared with universal use of clopidogrel. However, universal use of ticagrelor was the most effective strategy overall and the incremental cost-effectiveness compared with the genotyping strategy was generally within what is considered acceptable.


CONCLUSION
Ticagrelor is likely to be cost-effective even for individuals not carrying a CYP2C19 LoF allele.