Literature DB >> 20662625

Cost effectiveness of rosuvastatin in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease based on findings from the JUPITER trial.

Robert L Ohsfeldt1, Sanjay K Gandhi, Lee J Smolen, Marie M Jensen, Kathleen M Fox, Alex Gold, Judith Hsia.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the long-term cost effectiveness of rosuvastatin therapy compared with placebo in reducing the incidence of major cardiovascular (CVD) events and mortality.
METHODS: A probabilistic Monte Carlo simulation model estimated long-term cost effectiveness of rosuvastatin therapy (20 mg daily) for the prevention of CVD mortality and morbidity. The model included three stages: (1) CVD prevention simulating the 4 years of the JUPITER trial, (2) initial CVD prevention beyond the trial, and (3) subsequent CVD event prevention. A US payer perspective was assessed reflecting direct medical costs, and up to a lifetime horizon. Sensitivity analyses tested the robustness of the model estimates.
RESULTS: For a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 patients at moderate and high risk of CVD events based on Framingham risk of ≥10%, estimated quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained with rosuvastatin therapy compared with placebo was 33,480 over a lifetime horizon, and 25,380 and 9916 over 20-year and 10-year horizons, respectively. Approximately 12,073 events were avoided over the lifetime; 6,146 non-fatal MIs, 2905 non-fatal strokes, and 4030 CVD deaths avoided. Estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for cost per QALY was $7062 (lifetime), $10,743 (20-year horizon), and $44,466 (10-year horizon). For a hypothetical cohort similar to the overall JUPITER population, the cost per QALY ICER was $11,025 for the lifetime and $60,112 for a 10-year horizon. LIMITATIONS: The cost-effectiveness comparison of rosuvastatin 20 mg was against no active treatment (as opposed to an alternative statin) due to lack of comparative cardiovascular morbidity and mortality risk reduction data for other statins in a population similar to the JUPITER trial population. The analysis was conducted from the payer perspective and lack of inclusion of indirect costs limit interpretability of results from a societal perspective.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with rosuvastatin 20 mg daily, is a cost-effective treatment alternative to no treatment in patients at a higher risk (Framingham risk≥10%) of CVD.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20662625     DOI: 10.3111/13696998.2010.499758

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Econ        ISSN: 1369-6998            Impact factor:   2.448


  9 in total

1.  Primary Care Physician Perspectives on Barriers to Statin Treatment.

Authors:  Rikki M Tanner; Monika M Safford; Keri L Monda; Benjamin Taylor; Ronan O'Beirne; Melanie Morris; Lisandro D Colantonio; Ricardo Dent; Paul Muntner; Robert S Rosenson
Journal:  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.727

Review 2.  Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Fiona Taylor; Mark D Huffman; Ana Filipa Macedo; Theresa H M Moore; Margaret Burke; George Davey Smith; Kirsten Ward; Shah Ebrahim
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-01-31

3.  A value-based analysis of hemodynamic support strategies for high-risk heart failure patients undergoing a percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  David Gregory; Dennis J Scotti; Gregory de Lissovoy; Igor Palacios; Simon Dixon; Brijeshwar Maini; William O'Neill
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2013-03

Review 4.  A look at statin cost-effectiveness in view of the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol management guidelines.

Authors:  Roderick C Deaño; Ankur Pandya; Erica C Jones; William B Borden
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 5.113

5.  Cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin in comparison with generic atorvastatin and simvastatin in a Swedish population at high risk of cardiovascular events.

Authors:  Sanjay K Gandhi; Marie M Jensen; Kathleen M Fox; Lee Smolen; Anders G Olsson; Thomas Paulsson
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2012-01-10

6.  Economic evaluation of statins in high-risk patients treated for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Greece.

Authors:  Vassilis Fragoulakis; Georgia Kourlaba; Nikolaos Maniadakis
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2012-05-29

7.  Eligibility for PCSK9 treatment in 734 Hypercholesterolemic patients referred to a regional cholesterol treatment center with LDL cholesterol ≥ 70 mg/dl despite maximal tolerated cholesterol lowering therapy.

Authors:  Charles J Glueck; Parth Shah; Naila Goldenberg; Marloe Prince; Kevin Lee; Vybhav Jetty; Ashwin Kumar; Michael Goldenberg; Ping Wang
Journal:  Lipids Health Dis       Date:  2016-03-12       Impact factor: 3.876

8.  Pharmacoeconomics of PCSK9 inhibitors in 103 hypercholesterolemic patients referred for diagnosis and treatment to a cholesterol treatment center.

Authors:  Parth Shah; Charles J Glueck; Vybhav Jetty; Naila Goldenberg; Matan Rothschild; Rashid Riaz; Gregory Duhon; Ping Wang
Journal:  Lipids Health Dis       Date:  2016-08-18       Impact factor: 3.876

9.  Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Dov Shiffman; Andre R Arellano; Michael P Caulfield; Judy Z Louie; Lance A Bare; James J Devlin; Olle Melander
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 2.298

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.