Dave Fornell, DAIC Editor

Dave Fornell, Editor DAIC

Blog | Dave Fornell, DAIC Editor | July 09, 2014

Drawing the Line When Evaluating Cost vs. Benefit

A big fly in the ointment for widespread adoption of many new technologies is cost. In today’s cost-conscience environment of healthcare reform, there needs to be a clear, quantifiable return of investment (ROI). This is especially true for new medical technologies that are competing with a long-established standard of care, where the new technology must show either a cost-benefit over the older technology, or must show a big improvement in patient outcomes to justify the added expense. With a device that shows only an incremental increase in benefit, say a 1-2 percent or less improvement over existing technology, the question may become one of economics rather than device effectiveness.

This is not only a question for physicians, as it applies to vendors developing these products as well. One of the biggest examples of this is the case of drug-eluting stents. During the last decade, key stent vendors were in an arms race to build a better device and capture a large share of the then lucrative coronary stent market. This included extremely expensive, blockbuster clinical trials, massive R&D efforts, and lawsuits and countersuits to try to slow down the competition. However, this came to a halt with the SPIRIT IV trial results in 2010, which proved the Abbott Xience stent was the best in the market for patient outcomes and beat out the long-time market leader, the Boston Scientific Taxus stent.  

However, the victory only just edged out Taxus. Stent thrombosis improvements were measured in fractions of less than 1 percent, and ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization improvements were less than a 2.6 percentage-point absolute reduction. The data proving that Abbott was the top performer by only a small margin came at a staggering cost of nearly a billion dollars and several years of data collection. Few vendors are willing to shell out that sort of cash today to conduct similar sized trials that will be powered with enough patients to show only small incremental improvements.  

In reality, all the drug-eluting stents on the U.S. market today are good devices and all have similar patient outcomes. This has led to stents becoming commodity items, where lower pricing can often trump slightly better trial data. This is why the Xience stent does not master the entire stent market and why competitors remain in the game. 

I shared some additional thoughts on things to consider when looking at new devices and software in the article The Basics for Evaluating New Technology in the July-August issue of DAIC.

Related Content

ultrasound-activated microbubbles, heart attack, pig model, NIBIB, human clinical trials

An ultrasound-stimulated microbubble burrows through a fibrin clot (green) allowing penetration of the surrounding fluid into the clot (yellow). Image courtesy of Christopher Acconci and David Goertz, University of Toronto.

News | Ultrasound Imaging| February 11, 2016
Researchers funded by the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) used ultrasound-activated...

Image courtesy of Boston Scientific

Feature | Business| February 10, 2016 | Dave Fornell
After five years of almost constant lobbying efforts and numerous attempts by the U.S.
CeloNova, COBRA REDUCE trial, first patient enrolled, Cobra PzF coronary stent
News | Stents| February 10, 2016
CeloNova BioSciences Inc. announced this week that the first patient has been enrolled in its COBRA REDUCE trial. The...
ACC late breakers
News | ACC| February 09, 2016
February 9, 2016 — The late-breaking clinical trial presentations have been announced for the 2016 American College o
transcatheter repair of a mitral valve paravalvular leak

Transcatheter repair of a surgical mitral replacement paravalvular leak with an Amplatzer Vascular Plug II.

Feature | Heart Valve Repair| February 08, 2016 | Dave Fornell
Off-label use of the St.
Stereotaxis, Philips, collaboration, Niobe ES remote magnetic navigation system, Allura Xper FD10 cardiovascular X-ray

Niobe ES image courtesy of Stereotaxis Inc.

Technology | Cath Lab| February 04, 2016
February 4, 2016 — Stereotaxis and Philips have signed an addendum pursuant to their existing Development and Coopera
medtronic corevalve, tavr
News | February 03, 2016 | Dave Fornell
Medtronic announced Feb. 3 that the U.S.
Medtronic, CE Mark, Resolute Onyx DES, drug-eluting stent, expanded sizes and indications
News | Stents Drug Eluting| February 02, 2016
Medtronic plc announced the recent CE Mark and commercial launch for an expanded size matrix of the Resolute Onyx DES,...
TOBA-BTK study, six-month results, LINC 2016, Tack Endovascular System
News | Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD)| January 29, 2016
Intact Vascular Inc. announced that positive six-month results from its Tack Optimized Balloon Angioplasty – Below-the-...
Toshiba, CT-angiography, hybrid OR

Toshiba recently introduced a new line of combined CT and angiography systems, allowing true CT imaging on demand in the interventional lab.

Feature | Angiography| January 27, 2016 | Dave Fornell
All of the major vendors in the United States introduced new systems and technologies in the past few years to reduce...
Overlay Init