Cost per millimeter of mercury lowering is a measure of economic value for antihypertensive agents

Current Hypertension Reports

Volumn 2, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 525-529

  Chen, Roland S ^a   Lapuerta, Pablo ^a,b  

^a BRISTOL MYERS SQUIBB   (United States)

^b ROBERT WOOD JOHNSON MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG COMBINATION; DRUG EFFECT; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; REVIEW;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, AMBULATORY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG THERAPY, COMBINATION; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE);

EID: 0034547632     PISSN: 15226417     EISSN: 15343111     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11906-996-0036-5     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. He J, Whelton P: Epidemiology and prevention of hypertension. Med Clin North Am 1997, 81: 1077-1097.
2. Shea S: Hypertension control, 1994. Am J Public Health 1994, 84: 1725-1727.
3. Burt V, Cutler J, Higgins M, et al.: Trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in the adult US population:- Data from the Health Examination Surveys, 1960 to 1991. Hypertension 1995, 26: 60-69.
4. American Heart Association: http://www.AmericanHeart.org/ statistics/10econom.html; 2000.
5. Wilson T, Chockalingam A, Quest D: Pharmacoeconomics of hypertension control: basic principles of economic evaluation. J Human Hypertens 1996, 10:S19-S22. (Pubitemid 26101069)
6. Ambrosioni E, Costa F: Cost-effectiveness calculations from trials. J Hypertens 1996, 14:S47-S54. (Pubitemid 26386061)
7. Brown A, Garber A: A concise review of the cost-effectiveness of coronary heart disease prevention. Med Clin North Am 2000, 84: 279-297.
8. Gold M, Russell L, Siegel J, et al.: Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.
9. Psaty B, Siscovick D, Weiss N, et al.: Hypertension and outcomes research: from clinical trials to clinical epidemiology. Am J Hypertens 1996, 9: 178-183.
10. Weinstein M, Coxson P, Williams L, et al.: Forecasting coronary heart disease incidence, mortality, and cost: the coronary heart disease policy model. Am J Public Health 1987, 77: 1417-1426.
11. Edelson J, Weinstein M, Tosteson A, et al.: Long-term cost-effectiveness of various initial monotherapies for mild to moderate hypertension. JAMA 1990, 263: 408-413.
12. Huse D, Russell M, Miller J, et al.: Cost-effectiveness of statins. Am J Cardiol 1998, 82: 1357-1363.
13. Johannesson M: The cost-effectiveness of hypertension treatment in Sweden. Pharmacoeconomics 1995, 7: 242-250.
14. Anderson K, Odell P, Wilson P, et al.: Cardiovascular disease risk profiles. Am Heart J 1990, 121: 293-298.
15. Wilson P, D'Agostino R, Levy D, et al.: Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories. Circulation 1998, 97: 1837-1847.
16. Glynn R, L'Italien G, Sesso H, et al.: Cardivascular risk associated with hypertension - development of predictive models in 54,743 subjects. Eur Heart J 2000, 21:490.
17. Verdecchia P, Porcellati C, Schillaci G, et al.: Ambulatory blood pressure. An independent predictor of prognosis in essential hypertension. Hypertension 1994, 24: 793-801.
18. Perloff D, Sokolow M, Cowan R: The prognostic value of ambulatory blood pressures. JAMA 1983, 249: 2792-2798.
19. Wilson T, Lacourciere Y, Barnes C: The antihypertensive efficacy of losartan and amlodipine assessed with office and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. CMAJ 1998, 159: 469-476.
20. Kassler-Taub K, Littlejohn T, Elliott W, et al.: Comparative efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and losartan, in mild-to-moderate hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1998, 11: 445-453.
21. Oparil S, Guthrie R, Lewin A, et al.: An elective-titration study of the comparative effectiveness of two angiotensin II-receptor blockers, irbesartan and losartan. Clin Ther 1998, 20: 398-409.
22. Lorimer A, Lyons D, Fowler G, et al.: Differences between amlodipine and lisinopril in control of clinic and twentyfour hour ambulatory blood pressures. J Human Hypertens 1998, 12: 411-416.
23. Mallion J, Lacourciere Y: Telmisartan Blood Pressure Monitoring Group: a comparison of the blood pressure profile of telmisartan and losartan at 18-24 hours postdosing as measured by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring [abstract]. Am J Hypertens 1998, 11:262A.
24. Ruilope L, Palatini P, Grossman E, et al.: Randomized double-blind comparison of omapatrilat with amlodipine in mild-to-moderate hypertension [abstract]. Am J Hypertens 2000, 13:134A-135A.
25. Asmar R, Fredebohm W, Senftleber I, et al.: Omapatrilat compared with lisinopril in treatment of hypertension as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring [abstract]. Am J Hypertens 2000, 13:143A.
26. Sloan F, Whetten-Goldstein K, Wilson A: Hospital pharmacy decisions, cost containment, and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis. Soc Sci Med 1997, 45: 523-533.
27. Psaty B, Weiss N, Furberg C, et al.: Surrogate end points, health outcomes, and the drug-approval process for the treatment of risk factors for cardiovascular disease. JAMA 1999, 282: 786-790.
28. Califf R, Kramer J: What have we learned from the calcium channel blocker controversy. Circulation 1998, 97: 1529-1531.
29. Collins R, Peto R, MacMahon S, et al.: Blood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Lancet 1990, 335: 827-838.
30. SHEP Cooperative Research Group: Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP). JAMA 1991, 265: 3255-3264.
31. Dahlof B, Lindholm L, Hansson L, et al.: Morbidity and mortality in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension (STOP-Hypertension). Lancet 1991, 338: 1281-1285.
32. Hansson L, Lindholm L, Niskanen L, et al.: Effect of angiotensin- converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) Randomised Trial. Lancet 1999, 353: 611-616.
33. Hansson L, Lindholm L, Ekbom T, et al.: Randomised trial of old and new antihypertensive drugs in elderly patients: cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension-2 Study. Lancet 1999, 354: 1751-1756.
34. Neaton J, Grimm R, Prineas R, et al.: Treatment of mild hypertension study. JAMA 1993, 270: 713-724.
35. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group: Efficacy of atenolol and captopril in reducing risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 39. BMJ 1998, 317: 713-720.
36. Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers S, et al.: Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. Lancet 1998, 351: 1755-1762.
37. Temple R: Are surrogate markers adequate to assess cardiovascular disease drugs? JAMA 1999, 282: 790-795.
38. Tsevat J, Weinstein M, Williams L, et al.: Expected gains in life expectancy from various coronary heart disease risk factor modifications. Circulation 1991, 83: 1194-1201.
39. Hilleman D, Phillips J, Mohiuddin S, et al.: A population based treat-to-target pharmacoeconomic analysis of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors in hypercholesterolemia. Clin Ther 1999, 21: 536-562.
40. Koren M, Smith D, Hunninghake D, et al.: The cost of reaching National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goals in hypercholesterolaemic patients: a comparison of atorvastatin, simvastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin. Pharmacoeconomics 1998, 14: 59-70.
41. Andersson F, Kartman B, Andersson O: Cost-effectiveness of felodipine-metoprolol (Logimax) and enalapril in the treatment of hypertension. Clin Exp Hypertens 1998, 20: 833-846.
42. The ALLHAT Officers and Coordinators for the ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group: Major cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients randomized to doxazosin vs chlorthalidone. JAMA 2000, 283: 1967-1975.