A cost-utility analysis of losartan versus atenolol in the treatment of hypertension with left ventricular hypertrophy

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 387-400

  Anis, Aslam H ^a,b,f   Sun, Huiying ^b   Singh, Sonia ^b,c   Woolcott, John ^d   Nosyk, Bohdan ^b   Brisson, Marc ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b CENTRE FOR HEALTH EVALUATION AND OUTCOME SCIENCES   (Canada)

^c Peace Arch Hospital   (Canada)

^d BRITISH COLUMBIA CENTRE FOR DISEASE CONTROL   (Canada)

^e Merc Frosst Canada Ltd   (Canada)

^f ST PAUL S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATENOLOL; LOSARTAN;

AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CANADA; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG UTILIZATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH STATUS; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE HYPERTROPHY; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; LIFESPAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADRENERGIC BETA-ANTAGONISTS; AGED; ANGIOTENSIN II TYPE 1 RECEPTOR BLOCKERS; ATENOLOL; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COHORT STUDIES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; HYPERTROPHY, LEFT VENTRICULAR; INTENSIVE CARE; LOSARTAN; MALE; MODELS, ECONOMIC; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 33645809388     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11707690     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200624040-00008     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Murray CJLM, Lopez AD. Evidence-based health policy-lessons from the global burden of disease study. Science 1996; 274: 740-3
2. Joffres MR, Ghadirian P, Fodor JG, et al. Awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in Canada. Am J Hypertens 1997; 10 (10 Pt 1): 1097-102
3. Hansson L, Lindholm LH, Ekbom T, et al. Randomised trial of old and new anti-hypertensive drugs in elderly patients: cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, the Swedish trial in old patients with Hypertension-2 study. Lancet 1999; 354: 1751-6
4. Neal B, MacMahon S, Chapman N. Effects of ACE inhibitors, calcium antagonist, and other blood-pressure-lowering drugs: results of prospectively designed overviews of randomized trials. Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration. Lancet 2000; 356: 1955-64
5. Yusuf S, Sleight P, Pogue J, et al. Effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients: the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study investigators. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 145-53
6. Davis BR, Cutler JA, Gordon DJ, et al. Rationale and design for the Antihypertensive and Lipid Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). ALLHAT Research Group. Am J Hypertens 1996; 9: 342-60
7. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention for End point reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002; 359: 995-1003
8. Rundek T, Mast H, Hartmann A, et al. Predictors of resource use after acute hospitalization the northern Manhattan stroke study. Neurology 2000; 55: 1180-7
9. Tengs JO, Lin TH. A meta-analysis of quality-of-life estimates for stroke. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21 (3): 191-200
10. Sinclair SE, Frighetto L, Loewen PS, et al. Cost utility analysis of tissue plasminogen activator therapy for acute ischaemic stroke: a Canadian healthcare perspective. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 (9): 927-36
11. Stein JD, Brown GC, Brown MM, et al. The quality of life of patients with hypertension. J Clin Hypertens 2002 May-Jun; 4 (3): 181-8
12. Gore JM, Granger CB, Maarten SL, et al. Stroke after thrombolysis: mortality and functional outcomes in the GUSTO-I trial. Circulation 1995; 92: 2811-8
13. Kolominsky-Rabas PL, Sarti C, Heuschmann PU, et al. A prospective community-based study of stroke in Germany: the Erlangen Stroke Project. Stroke 1998; 29 (12): 2501-6
14. Tu JV, Austin PC, Walld R, et al. Development and validation of the Ontario acute myocardial infarction mortality prediction rules. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37 (4): 992-7
15. Statistics Canada. Life table [online]. Available from URL: http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/84-537-XIE/free.htm [Accessed 2003 Nov]
16. Government of British Columbia. Pharmacare low cost alternative reference drug program booklet. Version 1.1. 2003 Jan 15 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.healthservices.gov.bc.ca/pharme/outgoing/lca-rdpbooklet2004-11-24. pdf [Accessed 2003 Nov]
17. British Columbia Ministry of Health Services. Pharmacare Newsletter. January 23, 2002 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.healthservices.gov.bc. ca/pharme/newsletter/02001news.pdf [Accessed 2003 Nov]
18. British Columbia Ministry of Health Service. Pharmacare maximum days' supply policy [online]. Available from URL: http://www.hlth.gov.bc.ca/pharme/ generalinfo/maxdays.html [Accessed 2003 Nov]
19. Management Information Systems Project Steering Committee. Guidelines for management information systems in Canadian healthcare facilities. Ottawa (ON): The MIS Group, 2002
20. British Columbia Medical Association. BCMA guide to fees. 2002 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.bcma.org/public/news_publications/publications/ fee_guide.htm [Accessed 2003 Nov]
21. Canadian Institute for Health Information [online]. Available from URL: http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=statistics_topic_e [Accessed 2003 Nov]
22. Tung CY, Granger CB, Sloan MA, et al. Effects of stroke on medical resource and costs in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1999 Jan 26; 99 (3): 370-6
23. Canadian Institute for Health Information [online]. Available from URL: http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=statistics_topic_e [Accessed 2003 Nov]
24. Adams HP, Adams RJ, Brott T, et al. Guidelines for the early management of patients with ischemic stroke: a scientific statement from the Stroke Council of the American Stroke Association. Stroke 2003; 42: 1056-83
25. Hollander MJ. Unfinished business: the case for chronic home care services, a policy paper. Victoria (BC): Hollander Analytical Services Ltd, 2003 Aug
26. Dickstein K, Kjekshus J. Comparison of baseline data, initial course and management: losartan vs captopril following acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2001; 87: 766-71
27. Hart RG, Halpern JL. Atrial fibrillation and stroke: concepts and controversies. Stroke 2001; 32: 803-8
28. Drummond MF, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. Toronto: University Oxford Press, 1997: 164
29. O'Brien B. Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: Frankenstein's monster or vampire of trials? Med Care 1996; 34 (12 Suppl.): DS99-108
30. Product monograph. Cozaar® losartan potassium tablets. Whitehouse Station (NJ): Merck & Co Inc [online]. Available from URL: http://www.merckfrosst.com/e/cozaar/home.html [Accessed 2003 Nov]
31. Beck JR, Pauker SG. The Markov process in medical prognosis. Med Decis Making 1983; 3: 419-58
32. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Making 1993; 13: 322-38
33. Naimark D, Krahn MD, Naglie G, et al. Primer on medical decision analysis: part 5. Working with Markov processes. Med Decis Making 1997; 17: 152-9
34. Kemeny JG, Snell JL. Finite Markov chains. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1976
35. Palepu A, Tyndall MW, Leon H, et al. Hospital utilization and costs in a cohort of injection drug users. CMAJ 2001; 165 (4): 415-20
36. Bjorholt I, Andersson FL, Kahan T, et al. The cost-effectiveness of ramipril in the treatment of patients at high risk of cardiovascular events. J Intern Med 2002; 251 (6): 508-17
37. Statistics Canada. Health and personal care consumer price index. Series V735518, Table no. 3260001 [online]. Available from URL: www.statcan.ca [Accessed 2003 Nov]
38. Goldstein LB, Adams R, Becker K, et al. Primary prevention of ischemic stroke: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Stroke Council of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2001 Jan 2; 103 (1): 163-82
39. Briggs AH, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G. Thinking outside of the box. Annu Rev Public Health 2002; 23: 377-401
40. Julius S, Kjeldsen SE, Weber M, et al. Outcomes in hypertensive patients at high risk treated with regimens based on valsartan or amlodipine: the VALUE randomized trial. Lancet 2004; 363 (9426): 2022-31
41. Lewis EJ, Hunsicker LG, Clarke WR, et al. Renoprotective effect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001; 345 (12): 851-60
42. Parving HH, Lehnert H, Brochner-Mortensen J, et al. The effect of irbesartan on the development of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001; 345 (12): 870-8
43. Brenner BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, et al. Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001; 345 (12): 861-9
44. 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: irbesartan/losartan study investigators. Am J Hypertens 1998; 11 (4): 445-53
45. Mallion J, Siche J, Lacourciere Y. AABPM comparison of the antihypertensive profiles of the selective angiotensin II anatagonists telmisartan and losartan in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. J Hum Hypertens 1999; 13 (10): 657-64
46. Anderson OK, Neldom S. The antihypertensive effect and tolerability of candesartan cilexetil, a new generation angiotensin II antagonist, in comparison with losartan. Blood Press 1998; 7 (1): 53-9
47. Hedner T, Oparil S, Rasmussen K, et al. A comparison of the angiotensin II antagonists valsartan and losartan in the treatment of essential hypertension. Am J Hypertens 1999; 12 (4): 414-7
48. Johannesson M. The cost-effectiveness of the switch towards more expensive antihypertensive drugs. Health Policy 1994; 28 (1): 1-13
49. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, et al. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization: tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ 1992; 46: 473-81
50. Palmer AJ, Annemans L, Roze S, et al. Cost-effectiveness of early irbesartan treatment versus control (standard antihypertensive medications excluding ACE inhibitors, other angiotensin-2 receptor antagonists, and dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers) or late irbesartan treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and renal disease. Diabetes Care 2004; 27 (8): 1897-903
51. Nordmann AJ, Krahn M, Logan AG, et al. The cost effectiveness of ACE inhibitors as first-line antihypertensive therapy. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21 (8): 573-85
52. Kalra L, Evans A, Perez I, et al. A randomized controlled comparison of alternative strategies in stroke care. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9 (18): 1-94
53. van Exel J, Koopmanschap MA, van Wijngaarden JDH. Costs of stroke and stroke services: determinants of patient costs and a comparison of costs of regular care and care organized in stroke services. Cost Eff Resour Alloc 2003; 1: 2-11
54. Hamon M, Wiedermann CJ, Poole-Wilson PA, et al. Losartan for cardiovascular disease in patients with and without diabetes in the LIFE study [correspondence]. The Lancet 2002; 359 (9324): 2199-204
55. Carlberg B, Samuelsson O, Lindholm LH. Atenolol in hypertension: is it a wise choice? Lancet 2004; 364: 1684-9
56. Klingbeil AU, Schneider M, Martus P, et al. A meta-analysis of the effects of treatment on left ventricular mass in essential hypertension. Am J Med 2003; 115: 41-6
57. PROGRESS Collaborative Group. Randomised trial of a perindopril-based blood-pressure-lowering regimen among 6105 individuals with previous stroke or transient ischaemic attack. Lancet 2001; 358: 1033-41
58. The Canadian hypertension education program recommendations [online]. Available from URL: http://www.cmaj.ca [Accessed 2003 Nov]