IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v24y2006i8p815-830.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Effectiveness of Adding Ezetimibe to Atorvastatin Therapy in Patients Not at Cholesterol Treatment Goal in Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Michele Kohli
  • Cheryl Attard
  • Annette Lam
  • Daniel Huse
  • John Cook
  • Chantal Bourgault
  • Evo Alemao
  • Donald Yin
  • Michael Marentette

Abstract

Introduction: This analysis compared the cost effectiveness of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin therapy versus atorvastatin titration or adding cholestyramine (a resin) for patients at high risk of a coronary artery disease (CAD) event who did not reach target cholesterol levels on their current atorvastatin dosage. The primary analysis focused on 65-year-old patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels of 3.1 or 3.6 mmol/L with a treatment goal of >2.5 mmol/L, classified as very high risk according to the 2000 Canadian Guidelines for Management and Treatment of Hyperlipidaemia. Methods: A previously developed Markov model was utilised to capture the cost and clinical consequences of lipid-lowering therapy in primary and secondary prevention of CAD. Comparisons between treatment strategies were made using ICERs (cost per QALY) from a Canadian Ministry of Health perspective. The effects of lipid-lowering therapies were based on clinical trial data. The risks of CAD events were estimated using Framingham Heart Study risk equations. Treatment costs and the costs of acute and long-term care for CAD events were included in the analysis. Costs ($Can, 2002 values) and outcomes were discounted at 5% per annum. Results: Ezetimibe added to atorvastatin therapy compared with treatment with the most common fixed atorvastatin daily dosage (10mg) or with common atorvastatin titration strategies (up to 20mg daily; up to 40mg daily) resulted in cost per QALY estimates ranging from $Can25 344 to $Can44 332. The addition of ezetimibe to atorvastatin therapy was less costly and more effective than the addition of cholestyramine (dominant). Conclusion: Our analysis suggests that adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin for patients not achieving treatment goals with their current atorvastatin dose produces greater clinical benefits than treatment with a fixed-dose atorvastatin or atorvastatin titration at an increased overall cost. The cost-effectiveness ratios provide strong evidence for the adoption of ezetimibe within the Canadian healthcare system. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Michele Kohli & Cheryl Attard & Annette Lam & Daniel Huse & John Cook & Chantal Bourgault & Evo Alemao & Donald Yin & Michael Marentette, 2006. "Cost Effectiveness of Adding Ezetimibe to Atorvastatin Therapy in Patients Not at Cholesterol Treatment Goal in Canada," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 24(8), pages 815-830, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:24:y:2006:i:8:p:815-830
    DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200624080-00007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/00019053-200624080-00007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/00019053-200624080-00007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Oster, G. & Epstein, A.M., 1986. "Primary prevention and coronary heart disease: The economic benefits of lowering serum cholesterol," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 76(6), pages 647-656.
    2. Dennis G. Fryback & Erik J. Dasbach & Ronald Klein & Barbara E.K. Klein & Norma Dorn & Kathy Peterson & Patrica A. Martin, 1993. "The Beaver Dam Health Outcomes study," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 13(2), pages 89-102, June.
    3. Weinstein, M.C. & Coxson, P.G. & Williams, L.W. & Pass, T.M. & Stason, W.B. & Goldman, L., 1987. "Forecasting coronary heart disease incidence, mortality, and cost: The coronary heart disease policy model," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 77(11), pages 1417-1426.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rasstrigin, M. & Kitaev, A. & Pleshackova, E., 2023. "Forecasting spending on orphan diseases to maintain the long-run financial sustainability of healthcare system," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 120-141.
    2. William S. Weintraub & Samuel S. Gidding, 2016. "PCSK9 Inhibitors: A Technology Worth Paying For?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 217-220, March.
    3. Hirsch Ruchlin & Ralph Insinga, 2008. "A Review of Health-Utility Data for Osteoarthritis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 925-935, November.
    4. Louis S. Matza & Katherine J. Kim & Holly Yu & Katherine A. Belden & Antonia F. Chen & Mark Kurd & Bruce Y. Lee & Jason Webb, 2019. "Health state utilities associated with post-surgical Staphylococcus aureus infections," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 819-827, August.
    5. Michael F. Drummond;Adrian Towse, 1998. "From Efficacy to Cost-Effectiveness," Briefing 000438, Office of Health Economics.
    6. Yizhe Xu & Tom H. Greene & Adam P. Bress & Brian C. Sauer & Brandon K. Bellows & Yue Zhang & William S. Weintraub & Andrew E. Moran & Jincheng Shen, 2022. "Estimating the optimal individualized treatment rule from a cost‐effectiveness perspective," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 337-351, March.
    7. Robert F. Nease & Douglas K. Owens, 1994. "A Method for Estimating the Cost- Effectiveness of Incorporating Patient Preferences into Practice Guidelines," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 14(4), pages 382-392, October.
    8. Mark Roberts & Louise B. Russell & A. David Paltiel & Michael Chambers & Phil McEwan & Murray Krahn, 2012. "Conceptualizing a Model," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(5), pages 678-689, September.
    9. William M Reichmann & Jeffrey N Katz & Elena Losina, 2011. "Differences in Self-Reported Health in the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) and Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES-III)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(2), pages 1-7, February.
    10. Erik Nord & Paul Menzel & Jeff Richardson, 2003. "The value of life: individual preferences and social choice. A comment to Magnus Johannesson," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(10), pages 873-877, October.
    11. Stavros Petrou & Christine Hockley, 2005. "An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(11), pages 1169-1189, November.
    12. Gary A. Zarkin & Laura J. Dunlap & Katherine A. Hicks & Daniel Mamo, 2005. "Benefits and costs of methadone treatment: results from a lifetime simulation model," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(11), pages 1133-1150, November.
    13. Meltzer, David, 1997. "Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 33-64, February.
    14. Thi-Phuong-Lan Nguyen & Paul F M Krabbe & Thi-Bach-Yen Nguyen & Catharina C M Schuiling-Veninga & E Pamela Wright & Maarten J Postma, 2015. "Utilities of Patients with Hypertension in Northern Vietnam," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-9, October.
    15. Bob J. H. van Kempen & Bart S. Ferket & Albert Hofman & Sandra Spronk & Ewout Steyerberg & M. G. Myriam Hunink, 2012. "Do Different Methods of Modeling Statin Treatment Effectiveness Influence the Optimal Decision?," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(3), pages 507-516, May.
    16. Don Kenkel, 2006. "WTP- and QALY-Based Approaches to Valuing Health for Policy: Common Ground and Disputed Territory," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 34(3), pages 419-437, July.
    17. K Cooper & S C Brailsford & R Davies, 2007. "Choice of modelling technique for evaluating health care interventions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(2), pages 168-176, February.
    18. James F Burke & Kenneth M Langa & Rodney A Hayward & Roger L Albin, 2014. "Modeling Test and Treatment Strategies for Presymptomatic Alzheimer Disease," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(12), pages 1-20, December.
    19. William Hollingworth & Richard A. Deyo & Sean D. Sullivan & Scott S. Emerson & Darryl T. Gray & Jeffrey G. Jarvik, 2002. "The practicality and validity of directly elicited and SF‐36 derived health state preferences in patients with low back pain," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 71-85, January.
    20. Mengjun Wu & John Brazier & Benjamin Kearns & Clare Relton & Christine Smith & Cindy Cooper, 2015. "Examining the impact of 11 long-standing health conditions on health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D in a general population sample," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 16(2), pages 141-151, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:24:y:2006:i:8:p:815-830. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.