The cost-effectiveness of a new statin (Rosuvastatin) in the UK NHS

International Journal of Clinical Practice

Volumn 57, Issue 9, 2003, Pages 792-800

  Palmer, Stephen J ^a   Brady, A J ^b   Ratcliffe, A E ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b GLASGOW ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^c ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATORVASTATIN; CHOLESTEROL; FLUINDOSTATIN; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE INHIBITOR; LIPID; LOW DENSITY LIPOPROTEIN CHOLESTEROL; PRAVASTATIN; ROSUVASTATIN; SIMVASTATIN;

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; EUROPE; EXPERIMENTAL MODEL; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; HYPERCHOLESTEROLEMIA; HYPERLIPIDEMIA; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED KINGDOM;

CORONARY DISEASE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DRUG COSTS; FLUOROBENZENES; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL-COA REDUCTASE INHIBITORS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PYRIMIDINES; STATE MEDICINE; SULFONAMIDES;

EID: 0346958195     PISSN: 13685031     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Department of Health. National Service Framework, for coronary heart disease. London: DoH, 2000.
2. Department of Health. The National Service Framework for coronary heart disease: delivering better heart services. Progress report. London: DoH, 2003.
3. Hagan P. Heart health. Sunday Times, March 23, 2003.
4. EUROASPIRE II Study Group. Lifestyle and risk factor management and use of drug therapies in coronary patients from 15 countries: principal results from EUROASPIRE II Euro Heart Survey Programme. Eur Heart J 2001; 22: 554-572.
5. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group. Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 1994; 344: 1383-1389.
6. Shepherd J, Cobbe S, Ford I et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolaemia. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1301-1307.
7. Yeo W, Rowland-Yeo K. Workload implications and cost of statin treatment in the National Service Framework for coronary heart disease. Br J Cardiol 2000; 4: S11-S18.
8. Shepherd J. The statin era: in search of the ideal lipid regulating agent. Heart 2001; 85: 259-264.
9. Morris S, McGuire A, Caro J, Pettitt D. Strategies for the management of hypercholesterolaemia: a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness literature. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997; 2: 231-250.
10. Jonsson B. Economics of drug treatment: for which patients is it cost effective to lower cholesterol? Lancet 2001; 358: 1251-1256.
11. Pickin D, McCabe C, Ramsey L et al. Cost effectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) treatment related to the risk of coronary heart disease and cost of drug treatment. Heart 1999; 82: 325-332.
12. Department of Health. Prescription cost analysis: England 2002. London: DoH, 2003.
13. Parmigiani G. Modelling in medical decision making: a Bayesian approach. Chichester: John Wiley, 2002.
14. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Drumond M. A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Lancet 2002; 360: 711-715.
15. Wilson K, Marriott J, Fuller S et al. A model to assess the cost-effectiveness of statins in achieving the UK National Service Framework target cholesterol levels. PharmacoEconomics 2003; 21(suppl 1): 1-11.
16. Maclaine G, Patel H. A cost-effectiveness model of alternative statins to achieve target LDL-cholesterol levels. Int J Clin Pract 2001; 55: 243-249.
17. Smith D, Leslie S, Szucs T et al. Cost of treating to a modified European Atherosclerosis Society LDL-C target. Clin Drug Invest 1999; 17: 185-193.
18. Koren M, Smith D, Hunningshake D et al. The cost of reaching National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goals in hypercholesterolaemic patients. PharmacoEconomics 1998; 14: 59-70.
19. Cobos A, Jovell A, Garcia-Altes A et al. Which statin is most efficient for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia? A cost-effectiveness analysis. Clin Ther 1999; 21: 1924-1936.
20. Attanasio E, Russo P, Allen S. Cost- minimization analysis of simvastatin versus atorvastatin for maintenance therapy in patients with coronary or peripheral vascular disease. Clin Ther 2001; 23: 276-283.
21. Blasetto J, Stein E, Brown W et al. Efficacy of rosuvastatin compared with other statins at selected starting doses in hypercholesterolemic patients and in special population groups. Am J Cardiol 2003; 91(suppl): 3C-10C.
22. Shepherd J, Hunninghake D, Barter P et al. Guidelines for lowering lipids to reduce coronary artery disease risk: a comparison of rosuvastatin with atorvastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin for achieving lipid-lowering goals. Am J Cardiol 2003; 91: 11C-19C.
23. Jones P, Davidson M, Stein E et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR trial). Am J Cardiol 2003: 92: 152-160.
24. Briggs A. Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness models. PharmacoEconomics 2000: 17: 479-500.
25. Doubilet P, Begg C, Weinstein M. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation: a practical approach. Med Decis Making 1985: 5: 155-177.
26. Hilleman D, Phillips J, Mohiuddin S et al. A population-based treat-to-target pharmaceconomic analysis of HMG-COA reductase inhibitors in hypercholesterolemia. Clin Ther 1999; 21: 536-562.
27. Briggs A, Goeree R, Blackhouse G, O'Brien B. Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: choosing between treatment strategies for gastroespohageal reflux disease. Med Decis Making 2002; 22: 290-308.
28. Southworth H. Simulating titration to target clinical trials with statins. J Biopharm Stats 2002; 29: 101-127.
29. British Medical Association and Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. British national formulary. London, 2003.
30. Netten A, Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care. PSSRU: University of Kent, 2002.
31. Johannesson M, Weinstein S. On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis. J Health Econ 1993; 12: 459-467.
32. Van Hout BA, Al MJ, Gordon GS, Rutten FFH. Costs, effects and c/e-ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994; 3: 309-319.
33. Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2001; 10: 779-789.
34. The Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 7-22.
35. Jones P, Kafonek S, Laurora I, Hunninghake D. Comparative dose efficacy study of atorvastatin versus simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia (the CURVES study). Am J Cardiol 1998; 81: 582-587.
36. Olsson A, Istad H, Luurila O et al. Effects of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin compared over 52 weeks of treatment in patients with hypercholesterolemia. Am Heart J 2002; 144: 1044-1051.
37. Brown W, Bays H, Hassman D et al. Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin compared with pravastatin and simvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia: a randomized, double-blind, 52 week trial. Am Heart J 2002; 144: 1036-1043.
38. Schwandt P. The importance of reaching lipid targets: statins and the prevention of atherosclerosis. Int J Clin Pract 2003; 57: 1-9.
39. Grieve R, Hutton J, Green C. Selecting methods for the prediction of future events in cost-effectiveness models: a decision-framework and example from the cardiovascular field. J Health Policy 2003; 64: 311-324.
40. Haq I, Ramsay L, Yeo W et al. Is the Framingham risk function valid for northern European populations? A comparison of methods for estimating absolute coronary risk in high risk men. Heart 1999; 81: 40-46.