Literature DB >> 17135223

Cost effectiveness of perindopril in reducing cardiovascular events in patients with stable coronary artery disease using data from the EUROPA study.

Andrew Briggs1, Borislava Mihaylova, Mark Sculpher, Alistair Hall, Jane Wolstenholme, Maarten Simoons, Jaap Deckers, Roberto Ferrari, Willem J Remme, Michel Bertrand, Kim Fox.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The EUropean trial on Reduction Of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease (EUROPA) trial has recently reported.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness of perindopril in stable coronary heart disease in the UK.
METHODS: Clinical and resource use data were taken from the EUROPA trial. Costs included drugs and hospitalisations. Health-related quality of life values were taken from published sources. A cost-effectiveness analysis is presented as a function of the risk of a primary event (non-fatal myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest or cardiovascular death) in order to identify people for whom treatment offers greatest value for money.
RESULTS: The median incremental cost of perindopril for each quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained across the heterogeneous population of EUROPA was estimated as 9700 pounds(interquartile range 6400-14,200 pounds). Overall, 88% of the EUROPA population had an estimated cost per QALY below 20,000 pounds and 97% below 30,000 pounds. For a threshold value of cost effectiveness of 30,000 pounds per QALY gained, treatment of people representing the 25th, 50th (median) and 75th centiles of the cost effectiveness distribution for perindopril has a probability of 0.999, 0.99 and 0.93 of being cost effective, respectively. Cost effectiveness was strongly related to higher risk of a primary event under standard care.
CONCLUSIONS: Whether the use of perindopril can be considered cost effective depends on the threshold value of cost effectiveness of healthcare systems. For the large majority of patients included in EUROPA, the incremental cost per QALY gained was lower than the apparent threshold used by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the UK.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17135223      PMCID: PMC1955018          DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2005.086728

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart        ISSN: 1355-6037            Impact factor:   5.994


  21 in total

1.  Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

Authors:  E Fenwick; K Claxton; M Sculpher
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 2.  NICE: faster access to modern treatments? Analysis of guidance on health technologies.

Authors:  J Raftery
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-12-01

3.  The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36.

Authors:  John Brazier; Jennifer Roberts; Mark Deverill
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Authors:  Andrew H Briggs; Ron Goeree; Gord Blackhouse; Bernie J O'Brien
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis.

Authors:  Nancy Devlin; David Parkin
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 3.046

6.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients.

Authors:  S Yusuf; P Sleight; J Pogue; J Bosch; R Davies; G Dagenais
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-01-20       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Inhibition of neointima by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor in porcine coronary artery balloon-injury model.

Authors:  K Matsumoto; R Morishita; A Moriguchi; N Tomita; M Aoki; H Sakonjo; K Matsumoto; T Nakamura; J Higaki; T Ogihara
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 10.190

8.  Cost implications of the use of ramipril in high-risk patients based on the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) study.

Authors:  Andre Lamy; Salim Yusuf; Janice Pogue; Amiram Gafni
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2003-02-25       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Treatment benefit by perindopril in patients with stable coronary artery disease at different levels of risk.

Authors:  Jaap W Deckers; Dick M Goedhart; Eric Boersma; Andrew Briggs; Michel Bertrand; Roberto Ferrari; Willem J Remme; Kim Fox; Maarten L Simoons
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2006-02-23       Impact factor: 29.983

10.  Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study).

Authors:  K M Fox
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-09-06       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  16 in total

1.  ACE inhibitors: back to prime time?

Authors:  Milan Gupta; Subodh Verma; G B John Mancini
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of new generation coronary CT scanners for difficult-to-image patients.

Authors:  L T Burgers; W K Redekop; M J Al; S K Lhachimi; N Armstrong; S Walker; C Rothery; M Westwood; J L Severens
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2016-09-20

Review 3.  Value for money and the Quality and Outcomes Framework in primary care in the UK NHS.

Authors:  Simon Walker; Anne R Mason; Karl Claxton; Richard Cookson; Elisabeth Fenwick; Robert Fleetcroft; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Costs of inpatient care among Medicare beneficiaries with heart failure, 2001 to 2004.

Authors:  David J Whellan; Melissa A Greiner; Kevin A Schulman; Lesley H Curtis
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2009-11-10

Review 5.  Acknowledging patient heterogeneity in economic evaluation : a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Janneke P C Grutters; Mark Sculpher; Andrew H Briggs; Johan L Severens; Math J Candel; James E Stahl; Dirk De Ruysscher; Albert Boer; Bram L T Ramaekers; Manuela A Joore
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 4.981

6.  Subgroups and heterogeneity in cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Costs and effects of secondary prevention with perindopril in stable coronary heart disease in Poland: an analysis of the EUROPA study including 1251 Polish patients.

Authors:  W Ken Redekop; Ewa Orlewska; Pawel Maciejewski; Frans F H Rutten; Louis W Niessen
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  Cost-effectiveness of the diabetes care protocol, a multifaceted computerized decision support diabetes management intervention that reduces cardiovascular risk.

Authors:  Frits G W Cleveringa; Paco M J Welsing; Maureen van den Donk; Kees J Gorter; Louis W Niessen; Guy E H M Rutten; William K Redekop
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2009-11-23       Impact factor: 19.112

9.  Cost-effectiveness of a European preventive cardiology programme in primary care: a Markov modelling approach.

Authors:  Hema Mistry; Stephen Morris; Matthew Dyer; Kornelia Kotseva; David Wood; Martin Buxton
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  An Italian cost-effectiveness analysis of paclitaxel albumin (nab-paclitaxel) versus conventional paclitaxel for metastatic breast cancer patients: the COSTANza study.

Authors:  Carlo Lazzaro; Roberto Bordonaro; Francesco Cognetti; Alessandra Fabi; Sabino De Placido; Grazia Arpino; Paolo Marchetti; Andrea Botticelli; Paolo Pronzato; Elisa Martelli
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2013-04-11
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.