Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of the use of low- and high-potency statins in people at low cardiovascular risk.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Although statins have been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients at low cardiovascular risk, their absolute benefit is small in the short term, which may adversely affect cost-effectiveness. We sought to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness (beyond the duration of clinical trials) of low- and high-potency statins in patients at low cardiovascular risk and to estimate the impact on Canada's publicly funded health care system.

Methods

Using Markov modelling, we performed a cost-utility analysis in which we compared low-potency statins (fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin) and high-potency statins (atorvastatin and rosuvastatin) with no statins in a simulated cohort of low-risk patients over a lifetime horizon. Model outcomes included costs (in 2010 Canadian dollars), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and the cost per QALY gained.

Results

Over a lifetime horizon, the cost of managing a patient at low cardiovascular risk was estimated to be about $10,100 without statins, $15,200 with low-potency statins and $16,400 with high-potency statins. The cost per QALY gained with high-potency statins (v. no statins) was $21 300; the use of low-potency statins was not considered economically attractive. These results were robust to sensitivity analyses, although their use became economically unattractive when the duration of benefit from statin use was assumed to be less than 10 years.

Interpretation

Use of high-potency statins in patients at low cardiovascular risk was associated with a cost per QALY gained that was economically attractive by current standards, assuming that the benefit from statin use would continue for at least 10 years. However, the overall expenditure on statins would be substantial, and the ramifications of this practice should be carefully considered by policy-makers.

SUBMITTER: Conly J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3216439 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of the use of low- and high-potency statins in people at low cardiovascular risk.

Conly Jon J Clement Fiona F Tonelli Marcello M Hemmelgarn Brenda B Klarenbach Scott S Lloyd Anita A McAlister Finlay A FA Husereau Don D Wiebe Natasha N Au Flora F Manns Braden B

CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne 20111011 16

<h4>Background</h4>Although statins have been shown to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients at low cardiovascular risk, their absolute benefit is small in the short term, which may adversely affect cost-effectiveness. We sought to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness (beyond the duration of clinical trials) of low- and high-potency statins in patients at low cardiovascular risk and to estimate the impact on Canada's publicly funded health care system.<h4>Methods</h4>Using M ...[more]

PMID: 21989469

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionPeople living with HIV (PLHIV) have an elevated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to their HIV-negative peers. Expanding statin use may help alleviate this burden. However, the choice of statin in the context of antiretroviral therapy is challenging. Pravastatin and pitavastatin improve cholesterol levels in PLHIV without interacting substantially with antiretroviral therapy. They are also more expensive than most statins. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of pravastatin and pitavastatin for the primary prevention of CVD among PLHIV in Thailand who are not currently using lipid-lowering therapy.MethodsWe developed a discrete-state microsimulation model that randomly selected (with replacement) individuals from the TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database cohort who were aged 40 to 75 years, receiving antiretroviral therapy in Thailand, and not using lipid-lowering therapy. The model simulated each individual's probability of experiencing CVD. We evaluated: (1) treating no one with statins; (2) treating everyone with pravastatin 20mg/day (drug cost 7568 Thai Baht ($US243)/year) and (3) treating everyone with pitavastatin 2 mg/day (drug cost 8182 Baht ($US263)/year). Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assigned in annual cycles over a 20-year time horizon and discounted at 3% per year. We assumed the Thai healthcare sector perspective.ResultsPravastatin was estimated to be less effective and less cost-effective than pitavastatin and was therefore dominated (extended) by pitavastatin. Patients receiving pitavastatin accumulated 0.042 additional QALYs compared with those not using a statin, at an extra cost of 96,442 Baht ($US3095), giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2,300,000 Baht ($US73,812)/QALY gained. These findings were sensitive to statin costs and statin efficacy, pill burden, and targeting of PLHIV based on CVD risk. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of 160,000 Baht ($US5135)/QALY gained, we estimated that pravastatin would become cost-effective at an annual cost of 415 Baht ($US13.30)/year and pitavastatin would become cost-effective at an annual cost of 600 Baht ($US19.30)/year.ConclusionsNeither pravastatin nor pitavastatin were projected to be cost-effective for the primary prevention of CVD among PLHIV in Thailand who are not currently using lipid-lowering therapy. We do not recommend expanding current use of these drugs among PLHIV in Thailand without substantial price reduction.

Project description:BackgroundCholesterol guidelines typically prioritize primary prevention statin therapy on the basis of 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease. The advent of generic pricing may justify expansion of statin eligibility. Moreover, 10-year risk may not be the optimal approach for statin prioritization. We estimated the cost-effectiveness of expanding preventive statin eligibility and evaluated novel approaches to prioritization from a Scottish health sector perspective.MethodsA computer simulation model predicted long-term health and cost outcomes in Scottish adults ≥40 years of age. Epidemiologic analysis was completed using the Scottish Heart Health Extended Cohort, Scottish Morbidity Records, and National Records of Scotland. A simulation cohort was constructed with data from the Scottish Health Survey 2011 and contemporary population estimates. Treatment and cost inputs were derived from published literature and health service cost data. The main outcome measure was the lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, evaluated as cost (2020 GBP) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Three approaches to statin prioritization were analyzed: 10-year risk scoring using the ASSIGN score, age-stratified risk thresholds to increase treatment rates in younger individuals, and absolute risk reduction (ARR)-guided therapy to increase treatment rates in individuals with elevated cholesterol levels. For each approach, 2 policies were considered: treating the same number of individuals as those with an ASSIGN score ≥20% (age-stratified risk threshold 20, ARR 20) and treating the same number of individuals as those with an ASSIGN score ≥10% (age-stratified risk threshold 10, ARR 10).ResultsCompared with an ASSIGN score ≥20%, reducing the risk threshold for statin initiation to 10% expanded eligibility from 804 000 (32% of adults ≥40 years of age without CVD) to 1 445 500 individuals (58%). This policy would be cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, £12 300/QALY [95% CI, £7690/QALY-£26 500/QALY]). Incremental to an ASSIGN score ≥20%, ARR 20 produced ≈8800 QALYs and was cost-effective (£7050/QALY [95% CI, £4560/QALY-£10 700/QALY]). Incremental to an ASSIGN score ≥10%, ARR 10 produced ≈7950 QALYs and was cost-effective (£11 700/QALY [95% CI, £9250/QALY-£16 900/QALY]). Both age-stratified risk threshold strategies were dominated (ie, more expensive and less effective than alternative treatment strategies).ConclusionsGeneric pricing has rendered preventive statin therapy cost-effective for many adults. ARR-guided therapy is more effective than 10-year risk scoring and is cost-effective.

Project description:BackgroundExpanding statin use may help to alleviate the excess burden of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in people living with HIV (PLHIV). Pravastatin and pitavastatin are preferred agents due to their lack of substantial interaction with antiretroviral therapy. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of pravastatin and pitavastatin for the primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease among PLHIV in the United States.MethodsWe developed a microsimulation model that randomly selected (with replacement) individuals from the Data-collection on Adverse Effects of Anti-HIV Drugs study with follow-up between 2013 and 2016. Our study population was PLHIV aged 40 to 75 years, stable on antiretroviral therapy, and not currently using lipid-lowering therapy. Direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assigned in annual cycles and discounted at 3% per year. We assumed a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY gained. The interventions assessed were as follows: (1) treating no one with statins; (2) treating everyone with generic pravastatin 40 mg/day (drug cost $236/year) and (3) treating everyone with branded pitavastatin 4 mg/day (drug cost $2,828/year). The model simulated each individual's probability of experiencing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease over 20 years.ResultsPersons receiving pravastatin accrued 0.024 additional QALYs compared with those not receiving a statin, at an incremental cost of $1338, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $56,000/QALY gained. Individuals receiving pitavastatin accumulated 0.013 additional QALYs compared with those using pravastatin, at an additional cost of $18,251, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,444,000/QALY gained. These findings were most sensitive to the pill burden associated with daily statin administration, statin costs, statin efficacy and baseline atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, no statin was optimal in 5.2% of simulations, pravastatin was optimal in 94.8% of simulations and pitavastatin was never optimal.ConclusionsPravastatin was projected to be cost-effective compared with no statin. With substantial price reduction, pitavastatin may be cost-effective compared with pravastatin. These findings bode well for the expanded use of statins among PLHIV in the United States. To gain greater confidence in our conclusions it is important to generate strong, HIV-specific estimates on the efficacy of statins and the quality-of-life burden associated with taking an additional daily pill.

Project description:BackgroundRegularity and continuity of general practitioner (GP) contacts are associated with reduced hospitalisation. Opportunities for improved medication management are cited as a potential cause.ObjectiveDetermine associations between continuity and regularity of primary care and statin use amongst individuals at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes.DesignObservational cohort study using self-report and administrative data from 267,153 participants of the Sax Institute's 45 and Up Study conducted in New South Wales, Australia. from 2006 to 2009. Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) and Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) data, from Services Australia, were linked to survey, hospital and death data by the NSW Centre for Health Record Linkage.ParticipantsThe 45 and Up Study participants at risk of CVD outcomes based on self-report and administrative data, divided into existing users and potential users based on dispensing records through the exposure period.Main measuresThe Continuity of Care index (COC), measuring whether patients see the same GP, and an index assessing whether GP visits are on a regular basis, measured from July 2011 to June 2012. Amongst potential users, statin initiation from July 2012 to June 2013 was assessed using logistic regression; amongst existing users, adherence was assessed from July 2012 to June 2015 using Cox regression (non-adherence being 30 days without statins).Key resultsAmongst 29,420 potential users, the most regular quintile had 1.22 times the odds of initiating statin (95%CI 1.11-1.34), while the high continuity group had an odds ratio of 1.12 (95%CI 1.02-1.24). Amongst 30,408 existing users, the most regular quintile had 0.82 the hazard of non-adherence (95%CI 0.78-0.87); the high continuity group had a hazard ratio of 0.89 (95%CI 0.84-0.94).ConclusionsRegularity and continuity of care impact on medication management. It is possible that this mediates impacts on hospitalisation. Where there is a risk of unobserved confounding, potential causal pathways should be investigated.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness of the use of low- and high-potency statins in people at low cardiovascular risk.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Cost-effectiveness of the use of low- and high-potency statins in people at low cardiovascular risk.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets