IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v27y2009i3p221-230.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Lifetime Cost Effectiveness of Amlodipine-Based Therapy Plus Atorvastatin Compared with Atenolol Plus Atorvastatin, Amlodipine-Based Therapy Alone and Atenolol-Based Therapy Alone

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Lindgren
  • Martin Buxton
  • Thomas Kahan
  • Neil Poulter
  • Björn Dahlöf
  • Peter Sever
  • Hans Wedel
  • Bengt Jönsson

Abstract

Background: ASCOT (Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial) showed in hypertensive patients that blood pressure-lowering treatment with an amlodipine-based regimen reduces events compared with an atenolol-based regimen and that atorvastatin was more effective than placebo. Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of four alternative treatment strategies in patients with hypertension and three or more cardiovascular risk factors in the UK (from the UK NHS perspective) or Sweden (from the societal perspective): amlodipine-based plus atorvastatin, atenolol-based plus atorvastatin, amlodipine-based alone and atenolol-based alone. Methods: Based on the trial data, a Markov model was constructed where the risk of myocardial infarction, revascularization procedures and stroke and the long-term costs, quality of life and mortality associated with these events were estimated. Transition probabilities and costs (€, year 2007 values) were based on the patient-level trial data. Outcomes were reported as life-years gained and QALYs. In the latter case, utility reduction from events was based on a substudy in ASCOT patients. Treatment was applied for the duration of the lipid-lowering arm of the trial (3 years) and patients were then followed to the end of their life. Results: Amlodipine-based therapy plus atorvastatin was the most expensive but also most effective treatment. Compared with amlodipine-based therapy alone, the cost to gain one QALY was h11 965 in the UK and €8591 in Sweden. The incremental cost effectiveness of amlodipine-based therapy compared with atenolol-based therapy was €9548 and €3965 per QALY gained in the UK and Sweden, respectively. Atenolol-based therapy plus atorvastatin was eliminated through extended dominance. Conclusion: Applying the threshold values used by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare, a combination of amlodipine-based therapy and atorvastatin appears to be cost effective in patients with hypertension and three or more additional risk factors. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2009

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Lindgren & Martin Buxton & Thomas Kahan & Neil Poulter & Björn Dahlöf & Peter Sever & Hans Wedel & Bengt Jönsson, 2009. "The Lifetime Cost Effectiveness of Amlodipine-Based Therapy Plus Atorvastatin Compared with Atenolol Plus Atorvastatin, Amlodipine-Based Therapy Alone and Atenolol-Based Therapy Alone," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 221-230, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:27:y:2009:i:3:p:221-230
    DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200927030-00005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/00019053-200927030-00005
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/00019053-200927030-00005?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. Peter Lindgren & Thomas Kahan & Neil Poulter & Martin Buxton & Patrick Svarvar & Björn Dahlöf & Bengt Jönsson, 2007. "Utility loss and indirect costs following cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients: the ASCOT health economic substudy," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 8(1), pages 25-30, March.
    2. David Meltzer, 1997. "Accounting for Future Costs in Medical Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," NBER Working Papers 5946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Frank A. Sonnenberg & J. Robert Beck, 1993. "Markov Models in Medical Decision Making," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 13(4), pages 322-338, December.
    4. Meltzer, David, 1997. "Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 33-64, February.
    5. Magnus Johannesson & David Meltzer & Richard M. O'Conor, 1997. "Incorporating Future Costs in Medical Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 17(4), pages 382-389, October.
    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. Anna Ringborg & Peter Lindgren & Bengt Jönsson, 2005. "The cost-effectiveness of dual oral antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 6(4), pages 354-362, December.
    2. Braden Manns & David Meltzer & Ken Taub & Cam Donaldson, 2003. "Illustrating the impact of including future costs in economic evaluations: an application to end‐stage renal disease care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(11), pages 949-958, November.
    3. Jönsson, Linus & Borgström, Fredrik & Zethraeus, Niklas, 2002. "Cost-Effectiveness of Alendronate in the Treatment of Osteoporosis in Denmark - An Economic Evaluation Based on the Fracture Intervention Trial," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 501, Stockholm School of Economics.
    4. Mark Sculpher & David Torgerson & Ron Goeree & Bernie O'Brien, 1999. "A critical structured review of economic evaluations of interventions for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis," Working Papers 169chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    5. Peter Lindgren & Bengt Jönsson, 2012. "Cost–effectiveness of statins revisited: lessons learned about the value of innovation," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(4), pages 445-450, August.
    6. Bengt Liljas & Göran S. Karlsson & Nils‐Olov Stålhammar, 2008. "On future non‐medical costs in economic evaluations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 579-591, May.
    7. Mira Johri & Laura J. Damschroder & Brian J. Zikmund‐Fisher & Peter A. Ubel, 2005. "The importance of age in allocating health care resources: does intervention‐type matter?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(7), pages 669-678, July.
    8. Sun-Young Kim & Sue Goldie, 2008. "Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Vaccination Programmes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 191-215, March.
    9. Bengt Liljas, 2011. "Welfare, QALYs, and costs – a comment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 68-72, January.
    10. Douglas Lundin & Joakim Ramsberg, 2008. "On survival consumption costs – a reply to Nyman," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(2), pages 293-297, February.
    11. John A. Nyman, 2006. "More on survival consumption costs in cost‐utility analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 319-322, March.
    12. Kenneth Manton & Kenneth Land, 2000. "Active life expectancy estimates for the U.S. elderly population: A multidimensional continuous-mixture model of functional change applied to completed Cohorts, 1982–1996," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 37(3), pages 253-265, August.
    13. Stefan Felder, 2006. "Lebenserwartung, medizinischer Fortschritt und Gesundheitsausgaben: Theorie und Empirie," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(s1), pages 49-73, May.
    14. Ernst R. Berndt & David M. Cutler & Richard Frank & Zvi Griliches & Joseph P. Newhouse & Jack E. Triplett, 2001. "Price Indexes for Medical Care Goods and Services -- An Overview of Measurement Issues," NBER Chapters, in: Medical Care Output and Productivity, pages 141-200, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Pieter H. M. van Baal & Talitha L. Feenstra & Johan J. Polder & Rudolf T. Hoogenveen & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2011. "Economic evaluation and the postponement of health care costs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 432-445, April.
    16. Kenkel, Don, 1997. "On valuing morbidity, cost-effectiveness analysis, and being rude," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 749-757, December.
    17. Michael E. Darden & Robert Kaestner, 2022. "Smoking, selection, and medical care expenditures," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 64(3), pages 251-285, June.
    18. David M. Cutler & Ellen Meara, 1998. "The Medical Costs of the Young and Old: A Forty-Year Perspective," NBER Chapters, in: Frontiers in the Economics of Aging, pages 215-246, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Joshua Graff Zivin, 2001. "Cost‐effectiveness analysis with risk aversion," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(6), pages 499-508, September.
    20. Basu, Anirban, 2015. "Welfare implications of learning through solicitation versus diversification in health care," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 165-173.

    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:27:y:2009:i:3:p:221-230. 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.