IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0299236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Shexiang Baoxin Pill (MUSKARDIA) as the add-on treatment to standard therapy for stable coronary artery disease in China

Author

Listed:
  • Jie Pan
  • Ping-da Ping
  • Wei Wang
  • Jia-meng Zhou
  • Wen-tao Zhu

Abstract

Background: Recent evidence indicates that Shexiang Baoxin Pill (MUSKARDIA), as an add-on treatment to standard therapy for stable coronary artery disease (CAD), is effective. Nevertheless, the cost-effectiveness of introducing the Shexiang Baoxin Pill (Abbreviation SBP) to the current standard treatment for patients with CAD in China remains unknown. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of introducing SBP into the current standard treatment in China for patients with CAD. Method: The effects of two treatment strategies—the SBP group (SBP combined with standard therapy) and the standard therapy group (placebo combined with standard therapy)—were simulated using a long-term Markov model. The simulation subjects might experience non-fatal MI and/or stroke or vascular or non-vascular death events. The study parameters were primarily derived from the MUSKARDIA trial, which was a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IV randomized clinical trial. Furthermore, age-related change, event costs, and event utilities were drawn from publicly available sources. Both costs and health outcomes were discounted at 5.0% per annum. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to verify the robustness of the model. Based on the MUSKARDIA trial results, the risk with the events of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was decreased (P

Suggested Citation

  • Jie Pan & Ping-da Ping & Wei Wang & Jia-meng Zhou & Wen-tao Zhu, 2024. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of Shexiang Baoxin Pill (MUSKARDIA) as the add-on treatment to standard therapy for stable coronary artery disease in China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-15, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0299236
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299236
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0299236
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0299236&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0299236?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0299236. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.