IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v6y1997i6p589-601.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparison of economic modelling and clinical trials in the economic evaluation of cholesterol‐modifying pharmacotherapy

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Morris

Abstract

There are various ways in which data for economic evaluations may be obtained, including via clinical trials and via economic modelling. There are numerous advantages and disadvantages associated with each method, although it is generally assumed that economic models lack the accuracy required for the calculation of meaningful cost‐effectiveness data. In order to assess the predictive accuracy of economic modelling in the context of cholesterol‐modifying pharmacotherapy it is possible to compare predicted coronary heart disease (CHD) incidence estimates obtained using CHD risk equations derived from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) with actual CHD incidence rates achieved in a major clinical trial, the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS). FHS‐derived CHD risk equations substantially underestimate the actual risks of nonfatal myocardial infarction obtained by WOSCOPS. However, in predicting risks of death from CHD, FHS‐derived CHD risk equations estimate extremely accurately the incidence obtained by WOSCOPS. For example, from WOSCOPS the risk of an individual fulfilling the trial entry criteria incurring nonfatal myocardial infarction or CHD death in 4.9 years is 0.079 for placebo group and 0.055 for the intervention group. Therefore, the relative risk for the intervention group relative to placebo group is 0.696, implying a risk reduction of 30%. Comparable risks predicted using FHS‐derived CHD risk equations are 0.116 for the placebo group and 0.088 for the intervention group. Consequent relative risks and risk reductions for the intervention relative to placebo are 0.757 and 24%, respectively. Using both model and trial estimates of CHD incidence in an economic evaluation of cholesterol‐modifying pharmacotherapy, incremental costs per life year gained are £41 707 using WOSCOPS data and £36 480 using FHS‐derived CHD risk equations. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Morris, 1997. "A comparison of economic modelling and clinical trials in the economic evaluation of cholesterol‐modifying pharmacotherapy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(6), pages 589-601, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:6:y:1997:i:6:p:589-601
    DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199711)6:6<589::AID-HEC286>3.0.CO;2-D
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199711)6:63.0.CO;2-D
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199711)6:6<589::AID-HEC286>3.0.CO;2-D?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brian Rittenhouse, 1996. "Uses of Models in Economic Evaluations of Medicines and Other Health Technologies," Monograph 000419, Office of Health Economics.
    2. Byers, T. & Mullis, R. & Anderson, J. & Dusenbury, L. & Gorski, R. & Kimber, C. & Krueger, K. & Kuester, S. & Mokdad, A. & Perry, G. & Smith, C.A., 1995. "The costs and effects of a nutritional education program following work- site cholesterol screening," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 85(5), pages 650-655.
    3. Mike Drummond & Alastair McGuire & Astrid Fletcher, 1993. "Economic evaluation of drug therapy for hypercholesterolaemia in the United Kingdom," Working Papers 104chedp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jonas Hermansson & Thomas Kahan, 2018. "Systematic Review of Validity Assessments of Framingham Risk Score Results in Health Economic Modelling of Lipid-Modifying Therapies in Europe," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 205-213, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John A. Nyman, 2004. "Should the consumption of survivors be included as a cost in cost–utility analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 417-427, May.
    2. Ágota Szende & Z. Mogyorósy & N. Muszbek & J. Nagy & G. Pallos & C Dözsa, 2002. "Methodological guidelines for conducting economic evaluation of healthcare interventions in Hungary: a Hungarian proposal for methodology standards," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 3(3), pages 196-206, September.
    3. Kobelt, G., 2013. "Health Economics: An Introduction to Economic Evaluation," Monographs, Office of Health Economics, number 000004.
    4. Office of Health Economics, 1997. "The Pros and Cons of Modelling in Economic Evaluation," Briefing 000428, Office of Health Economics.
    5. John Paul Ekwaru & Arto Ohinmaa & Bach Xuan Tran & Solmaz Setayeshgar & Jeffrey A Johnson & Paul J Veugelers, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of a school-based health promotion program in Canada: A life-course modeling approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-13, May.

    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:wly:hlthec:v:6:y:1997:i:6:p:589-601. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    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.