Statin cost-effectiveness comparisons using real-world effectiveness data: Formulary implications

Value in Health

Volumn 11, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 1061-1069

  Ohsfeldt, Robert L ^a   Gandhi, Sanjay K ^b   Fox, Kathleen M ^c   McKenney, James M ^d  

^a TEXAS A AND M HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (United States)

^b ASTRAZENECA   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d National Clinical Research Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

ATP III goal attainment; Cost effectiveness; LDL reduction; Real world effectiveness; Rosuvastatin

Indexed keywords

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

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; LIPID BLOOD LEVEL; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; TREATMENT DURATION;

EID: 53749086313     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00354.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. American Heart Association. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: 2005 Update. Dallas, TX : American Heart Association, 2004.
2. Goetzel RZ, Hawkins K, Ozminkowski RJ, Wang S. The health and productivity cost burden of the 'top 10' physical and mental health conditions affecting six large US employers in 1999. J Occup Environ Med 2003 45 : 5 14.
3. American Heart Association. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics: 2003 Update. Dallas, TX : American Heart Association, 2003.
4. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 2001 285 : 2486 97.
5. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statin after acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2004 350 : 1495 504.
6. Berne C, Siewert-Delle A, URANUS study investigators. Comparison of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin for lipid lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from the URANUS study. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2005 4 : 7.
7. Schuster H, Barter PJ, Stender S, et al. Effects of switching statins on achievement of lipid goals: Measuring effective reductions in cholesterol using rosuvastatin therapy (MERCURY I) study. Am Heart J 2004 147 : 705 13.
8. Quilliam BJ, Perez HE, Andros V, Jones P. Quantifying the effect of applying the NCEP ATP III criteria in a managed care population treated with statin therapy. J Manag Care Pharm 2004 10 : 244 50.
9. Harley CR, Williams SA, McDonough KL, et al. Cholesterol management in a population of managed care enrollees. J Clin Outcomes Manage 2003 10 : 147 54.
10. Straka RJ, Taheri R, Cooper SL, et al. Assessment of hypercholesterolemia control in a managed care organization. Pharmacotherapy 2001 21 : 818 27.
11. Benner JS, Smith TW, Klingman D, et al. Cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin compared with other statins from a managed care perspective. Value Health 2005 8 : 618 28.
12. 2006 National Physician Fee Schedule Relative Value File. Available from: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/providers/pufdownload/rvudown.asp [Accessed May 6, 2006].
13. First DataBank National Drug Data File. Available from http://www.firstdatabank.com/ [Accessed May 6, 2006].
14. Doubilet P, Begg CB, Weinstein MC, et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulation: a practical approach. Med Decis Making 1985 5 : 157 77.
15. Briggs AH, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G. Thinking outside the box: recent advances in the analysis and presentation of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. Ann Rev Public Health 2002 23 : 377 401.
16. Miller W, Robinson LA, Lawrence RS, eds. Valuing Health for Regulatory Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Washington, DC : National Academies Press, 2006.
17. IMS Health, IMS National Sales Perspective (TM), 1999-2004, extracted February 2005.
18. Rubenstein S. Why generic doesn't always mean cheap. Wall St J March 13, 2007, p. 1.
19. National Committee for Quality Assurance: HEDIS 2004. Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set. Technical Specifications. Washington, DC : National Committee for Quality Assurance, 2003 : 374.
20. Gosfield AG. Pay-for-performance (P4P): transitional at best. Manag Care 2005 14 : 64 9.
21. The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) Study Group. Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med 1998 339 : 1349 57.
22. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002 360 : 7 22.
23. McKenney JM, Jones PH, Adamczyk MA, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin in achieving lipid goals: results from the STELLAR trial. Curr Med Res Opin 2003 19 : 689 98.
24. Morrison A, Glassberg H. Determinants of the cost-effectiveness of statins. J Manag Care Pharm 2003 9 : 544 51.
25. Jones PH, Davidson MH, Stein EA, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin across doses (STELLAR trial). Am J Cardiol 2003 93 : 152 60.
26. Bullano MF, Wertz DA, Yang GW, et al. Effect of rosuvastatin compared with other statins on lipid levels and National Cholesterol Education Program goal attainment for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in a usual care setting. Pharmacotherapy 2006 26 : 469 78.
27. Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) collaborators. Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment. prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet 2005 366 : 1267 78.