Oral Antiplatelet Therapy in Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events: An Assessment from the Payer's Perspective
Abstract
Background: A wide variety of oral antiplatelet trials have been carried out, and a large number of cost-effectiveness estimates based on them have been published. Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of oral antiplatelet treatments in the prevention of cardiovascular events. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was carried out in PubMed and the Cochrane Library and the data reviewed. Cost-effectiveness or cost-utility studies of oral antiplatelets published since 2000 were selected. Cost-effectiveness analyses from the perspective of the UK NHS were then carried out using a Markov model with a 6-month cycle length and a lifetime horizon. Inputs from the CAPRIE, CHARISMA, (PCI)-CURE, CREDO, COMMIT, CLARITY, ESPS 2 and ESPRIT trials were included. All estimates of cost found (per event avoided, per QALY gained or per life-year gained) were included. Results were analysed in light of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the use of antiplatelets for the prevention of cardiovascular events and all estimates were updated to Lstg (year 2006 values) for easy comparison. Results: Of the initial 141 studies found, 21 were included in the initial review. The literature and the Markov model subsequently used suggest that aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) dominates placebo for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events, as it is effective, is also less costly and is as well tolerated as placebo. Additionally, in periods or patients with elevated risk, more intensive treatment with clopidogrel (alone or together with aspirin) is cost effective compared with aspirin alone for the secondary prevention of ischaemic events. For secondary stroke prevention, combination therapy with aspirin and dipyridamole has a favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) when compared with aspirin alone and, based on an indirect comparison, also when compared with clopidogrel. Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness estimates presented in this article support the NICE guidelines for the use of antiplatelets for the prevention of cardiovascular events. Based on these pharmacoeconomic data alone, aspirin should be prescribed for primary or secondary prevention among patients at high risk of cardiovascular events, dipyridamole for the secondary prevention of stroke (for a maximum of 5 years), and clopidogrel for the treatment of symptomatic cardiovascular disease or acute coronary syndrome (for a maximum of 2 years). The cost effectiveness of antiplatelets hinges on the patient's initial risk, the risk reduction associated with treatment, and the price of the treatment. Evidence suggests that the cost effectiveness of antiplatelets can be optimized by individualising the treatment decision based on patient risk and expected risk reduction.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic Info
Article provided by Springer Healthcare | Adis in its journal PharmacoEconomics.
Volume (Year): 25 (2007)
Issue (Month): 12 ()
Pages: 1063-1082
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:25:y:2007:i:12:p:1063-1082
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://pharmacoeconomics.adisonline.com/
For corrections or technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Dave Dustin).
Related research
Keywords: Antiplatelets; Aspirin; Cardiovascular-disorders; Clopidogrel; Cost-effectiveness; Cost-utility; Dipyridamole;Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods
- D - Microeconomics
- I - Health, Education, and Welfare
- Z - Other Special Topics
- I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
- I19 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Other
- I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health
- I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wkh:phecon:v:25:y:2007:i:12:p:1063-1082For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dave Dustin).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.