High risk versus proportional benefit: Modelling equitable strategies in cardiovascular prevention

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 11, 2015, Pages

  Marchant, Ivanny ^a   Boissel, Jean Pierre ^b   Nony, Patrice ^c   Gueyffier, François ^c,d,e  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE VALPARAÍSO   (Chile)

^b Novadiscovery   (France)

^c LABORATOIRE DE BIOMÉTRIE ET BIOLOGIE EVOLUTIVE   (France)

^d INSERM   (France)

^e HOSPICES CIVILS DE LYON   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; BORDERLINE HYPERTENSION; CARDIOVASCULAR PREVENTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST; EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF CARDIOLOGY GUIDELINE; EUROPEAN SOCIETY OF HYPERTENSION GUIDELINE; EVIDENCE BASED SCENARIO; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIFE YEAR GAIN; METHODOLOGY; MODEL; OPINION BASED SCENARIO; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROPHYLAXIS; PROPORTIONAL BENEFIT STRATEGY; QUALITY OF LIFE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ADULT; BLOOD PRESSURE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG EFFECTS; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; RISK FACTOR; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENTS; BLOOD PRESSURE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RISK FACTORS; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 84951004196     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0140793     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Perk J, De Backer G, Gohlke H, Graham I, Reiner Z, Verschuren M, et al. (2012) European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012). The Fifth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts). Eur Heart J 33: 1635-1701. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs092 PMID: 22555213
2. Marchant I, Nony P, Cucherat M, Boissel JP, Thomas SR, Bejan-Angoulvant T, et al. (2011) The global risk approach should be better applied in French hypertensive patients: a comparison between simulation and observation studies. PLoS One 6: e17508. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017508 PMID: 21408615
3. De Backer G, Ambrosioni E, Borch-Johnsen K, Brotons C, Cifkova R, Dallongeville J, et al. (2003) European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Third Joint Task Force of European and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice. Eur Heart J 24: 1601-1610. PMID: 12964575
4. Rose G (1981) Strategy of prevention: lessons from cardiovascular disease. British medical journal (Clinical research ed) 282: 1847-1851.
5. Mancia G, De Backer G, Dominiczak A, Cifkova R, Fagard R, Germano G, et al. (2007) 2007 Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 28: 1462-1536. PMID: 17562668
6. Graham I, Atar D, Borch-Johnsen K, Boysen G, Burell G, Cifkova R, et al. (2007) European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: executive summary. Eur Heart J 28: 2375-2414. PMID: 17726041
7. Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K, Redon J, Zanchetti A, Bohm M, et al. (2013) 2013 ESH/ESC guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 34: 2159-2219. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/eht151 PMID: 23771844
8. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C, Vinogradova Y, Robson J, May M, Brindle P (2007) Derivation and validation of QRISK, a new cardiovascular disease risk score for the United Kingdom: prospective open cohort study. Bmj 335: 136. PMID: 17615182
9. Claxton K, Paulden M, Gravelle H, Brouwer W, Culyer AJ (2011) Discounting and decision making in the economic evaluation of health-care technologies. Health Econ 20: 2-15. doi: 10.1002/hec.1612 PMID: 21154521
10. Sozou PD (2009) Individual and social discounting in a viscous population. Proc Biol Sci 276: 2955-2962. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2009.0401 PMID: 19474046
11. Nord E (2011) Discounting future health benefits: the poverty of consistency arguments. Health Econ 20: 16-26. doi: 10.1002/hec.1687 PMID: 21154522
12. Earnshaw J, Lewis G (2008) NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal: pharmaceutical industry perspective. Pharmacoeconomics 26: 725-727. PMID: 18767892
13. Torgerson DJ, Raftery J (1999) Economic notes. Discounting. Bmj 319: 914-915. PMID: 10506056
14. Liew SM, Jackson R, Mant D, Glasziou P (2012) Should identical CVD risks in young and old patients be managed identically? Results from two models. BMJ Open 2: e000728. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000728 PMID: 22382122
15. Marchant I, Boissel JP, Kassai B, Bejan T, Massol J, Vidal C, et al. (2009) SCORE should be preferred to Framingham to predict cardiovascular death in French population. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 16: 609-615. doi: 10.1097/HJR.0b013e32832da006 PMID: 20054289
16. Conroy RM, Pyorala K, Fitzgerald AP, Sans S, Menotti A, De Backer G, et al. (2003) Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. Eur Heart J 24: 987-1003. PMID: 12788299
17. R Development Core Team (2011) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
18. Boissel JP, Kahoul R, Amsallem E, Gueyffier F, Haugh M, Boissel FH (2011) Towards personalized medicine: exploring the consequences of the effect model-based approach. Personalized Medicine 8: 581-586.
19. Gueyffier F, Froment A, Gouton M (1996) New meta-analysis of treatment trials of hypertension: improving the estimate of therapeutic benefit. J Hum Hypertens 10: 1-8. PMID: 8642184
20. Capewell S, Hayes DK, Ford ES, Critchley JA, Croft JB, Greenlund KJ, et al. (2009) Life-years gained among US adults from modern treatments and changes in the prevalence of 6 coronary heart disease risk factors between 1980 and 2000. Am J Epidemiol 170: 229-236. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwp150 PMID: 19541856
21. (2003) Techniques to measure the impact of mortality: years of potential life lost. Epidemiol Bull 24: 1-4.
22. (2010) Insee - Population - Évolution de l'espérance de vie à divers âges.
23. Gravelle H, Brouwer W, Niessen L, Postma M, Rutten F (2007) Discounting in economic evaluations: stepping forward towards optimal decision rules. Health Econ 16: 307-317. PMID: 17006970
24. WHO Definition of an older or elderly person. EWorld Health Organization.
25. Erhardt LR, Gotto A Jr. (2006) The evolution of European guidelines: changing the management of cholesterol levels. Atherosclerosis 185: 12-20. PMID: 16309687
26. Spiegelhalter DJ, Gore SM, Fitzpatrick R, Fletcher AE, Jones DR, Cox DR (1992) Quality of life measures in health care. III: Resource allocation. Bmj 305: 1205-1209. PMID: 1304741
27. Kahn R, Robertson RM, Smith R, Eddy D (2008) The impact of prevention on reducing the burden of cardiovascular disease. Diabetes Care 31: 1686-1696. doi: 10.2337/dc08-9022 PMID: 18663233
28. Thomopoulos C, Parati G, Zanchetti A (2014) Effects of blood pressure lowering on outcome incidence in hypertension: 3. Effects in patients at different levels of cardiovascular risk - overview and meta-analyses of randomized trials. J Hypertens 32: 2305-2314. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000000380 PMID: 25259548
29. Sundstrom J, Arima H, Woodward M, Jackson R, Karmali K, Lloyd-Jones D, et al. (2014) Blood pressure-lowering treatment based on cardiovascular risk: a meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 384: 591-598. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61212-5 PMID: 25131978
30. Granstrom O, Levin LA, Henriksson M (2012) Cost-effectiveness of candesartan versus losartan in the primary preventive treatment of hypertension. Clinicoecon Outcomes Res 4: 313-322. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S35824 PMID: 23144565
31. Goldman DP, Zheng Y, Girosi F, Michaud PC, Olshansky SJ, Cutler D, et al. (2009) The benefits of risk factor prevention in Americans aged 51 years and older. Am J Public Health 99: 2096-2101. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.172627 PMID: 19762651
32. Athanasakis K, Souliotis K, Tountas Y, Kyriopoulos J, Hatzakis A (2012) A cost-utility analysis of hypertension treatment in Greece: assessing the impact of age, sex and smoking status, on outcomes. J Hypertens 30: 227-234. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e32834d9f18 PMID: 22157591
33. Almeda-Valdes P, Cuevas-Ramos D, Mehta R, Gomez-Perez FJ, Aguilar-Salinas CA (2010) UKPDS Risk Engine, decode and diabetes PHD models for the estimation of cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes. Curr Diabetes Rev 6: 1-8. PMID: 20034373
34. Coleman R, Stevens R, Holman R (2012) Updated UKPDS Risk Engine that Estimates Primary and Secondary Cardiovascular Disease Risk in People With Recently-Diagnosed or Established Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes 61: A103.
35. Thomsen TF, McGee D, Davidsen M, Jorgensen T (2002) A cross-validation of risk-scores for coronary heart disease mortality based on data from the Glostrup Population Studies and Framingham Heart Study. Int J Epidemiol 31: 817-822. PMID: 12177028
36. Kengne AP, Patel A, Colagiuri S, Heller S, Hamet P, Marre M, et al. (2010) The Framingham and UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) risk equations do not reliably estimate the probability of cardiovascular events in a large ethnically diverse sample of patients with diabetes: the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) Study. Diabetologia 53: 821-831. doi: 10.1007/s00125-010-1681-4 PMID: 20157695
37. Guzder RN, Gatling W, Mullee MA, Mehta RL, Byrne CD (2005) Prognostic value of the Framingham cardiovascular risk equation and the UKPDS risk engine for coronary heart disease in newly diagnosed Type 2 diabetes: results from a United Kingdom study. Diabet Med 22: 554-562. PMID: 15842509
38. van der Heijden AAWA, Ortegon MM, Niessen LW, Nijpels G, Dekker JM (2009) Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease Risk in a General, Pre-Diabetic, and Diabetic Population During 10 Years of Follow-up: Accuracy of the Framingham, SCORE, and UKPDS Risk Functions The Hoorn Study. Diabetes Care 32: 2094-2098. doi: 10.2337/dc09-0745 PMID: 19875606
39. Hense HW, Schulte H, Lowel H, Assmann G, Keil U (2003) Framingham risk function overestimates risk of coronary heart disease in men and women from Germany - results from the MONICA Augsburg and the PROCAM cohorts. Eur Heart J 24: 937-945. PMID: 12714025
40. Coleman RL, Stevens RJ, Retnakaran R, Holman RR (2007) Framingham, SCORE, and DECODE risk equations do not provide reliable cardiovascular risk estimates in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 30: 1292-1293. PMID: 17290036
41. Diao D, Wright JM, Cundiff DK, Gueyffier F (2012) Pharmacotherapy for mild hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8: CD006742. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006742.pub2 PMID: 22895954