Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pharmacoeconomics of Lipid-Lowering Agents for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease

  • Review Article
  • Primary and Secondary Prevention of CAD
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death and the leading source of healthcare expenditure in the US and most other industrialised countries. Cholesterol lowering by pharmacological means prevents atherosclerotic plaque progression and has been shown to reduce both fatal and nonfatal coronary events in patients with or without coronary artery disease (CAD). Because of their excellent efficacy and safety profiles, the introduction of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (also known as ‘statins’) in 1987 raised hopes for demonstrating the survival benefit of cholesterol reduction. In the past decade, several large-scale placebo-controlled trials with statin therapy have revisited the relationship between cholesterol reduction, cardiovascular disease and mortality. The West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS) [pravastatin] and the Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS) [lovastatin] have shown significant cardiovascular disease reduction in primary prevention trials of patients with ele-vated and normal cholesterol levels, respectively. The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S), the Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) Study and the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial [pravastatin] have shown significant cardiovascular disease reduction in patients with a previous history of CAD with high, moderate and normal cholesterol levels, respectively. Three of these studies (4S, WOSCOPS and LIPID) have shown significant reduction in all-cause mortality, while all the statin secondary prevention trials (4S, CARE and LIPID) have demonstrated significant reduction in cerebrovascular disease.

Earlier cholesterol reduction cost-effectiveness studies with nonstatin treatments (bile acid resins, fibrates, niacin and diet) suggested that only patients at extremely high risk could be treated with lipid therapy in a cost-effective manner. More recently, rigorous outcomes evidence demonstrates that statins, particularly for simvastatin for secondary prevention and lovastatin for primary prevention, have a broadly favourable cost-effectiveness profile. Based on US medical price levels and the available clinical trial data on statins, it would be cost effective [e.g. cost less than $US50 000/year of life saved] to intervene with statin therapy in any patient with an annual CAD risk exceeding 1%. This includes all patients with pre-existing CAD or diabetes mellitus, and many more primary prevention patients than are currently contemplated by the US National Cholesterol Education Panel treatment guidelines. Achieving such a goal will require enormous changes in patient education, clinical perspective, healthcare practice and healthcare finances. But any proven opportunity for saving the lives of 25% of those dying from cardiovascular disease each year deserves to be considered with the utmost seriousness and urgency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gillium RF. Trends in acute myocardial infarction and coronary heart disease death in the United States. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 23: 1273–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goldman L, Cook F. The decline in ischemic heart disease mortality rates: an analysis of the comparative effects of medical interventions and changes in lifestyle. Ann Intern Med 1984; 101: 825–36

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sytokwski PA, Kannel WB, Agostino RB. Changes in risk factor and the decline in mortality from cardiovascular disease: The Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med 1990; 322: 1635–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. American Heart Association. 1998 Heart and stroke statistical update. Dallas (TX): American Heart Association, 1988

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wittels EH, Hay JW, Gotto AM. Medical costs of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1990; 65: 432–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Castelli WP, Anderson KM, Wilson PW, et al. Lipids and risk of coronary heart disease: The Framingham Study. Ann Epidemiol 1992; 2: 23–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Levy D, Wilson WF, Anderson KM, et al. Stratifying the patient at risk from coronary disease: new insights from the Framingham heart study. Am Heart J 1990; 119: 712–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Wong ND, Wilson PW, Kannel WB. Serum cholesterol as a prognostic factor after myocardial infarction: The Framingham Study. Ann Intern Med 1991; 115: 687–93

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Stamler J, Wentworth D, Neaton JD. Is the relationship between serum cholesterol and risk of premature death from coronary heart disease continuous and graded? JAMA 1986; 256: 2823–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Canner PL, Berge KG, Wenger NK, et al. Fifteen year mortality in Coronary Drug Project Research Group: long-term benefit with niacin. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986; 8: 1245–55

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Blankenhorn DW, Nessim SA, Johnson RL, et al. Beneficial effects of combined colestipol-niacin therapy on coronary atherosclerosis and coronary venous bypass grafts. JAMA 1987; 257: 3233–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group. Relationship between baseline risk factors and coronary heart disease and total mortality in the multiple risk factor intervention trial. Prev Med 1986; 15: 254–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lipid Research Clinics Program. The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trials Results. I: reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease. JAMA 1984; 251: 351–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lipid Research Clinics Program. The Lipid Research Clinical Coronary Primary Prevention Trials Results. II: the relationship of reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease to cholesterol-lowering. JAMA 1984; 251: 365–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Watts GF, Lewis B, Brunt JN, et al. Effects on coronary artery disease of lipid-lowering diet, or diet plus cholestyramine, in the St. Thomas’ Atherosclerosis Regression Study (STARS). Lancet 1992; 339: 563–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Brown G, Albers JJ, Fisher LD, et al. Regression of coronary artery disease as a result of intensive lipid lowering therapy in men with high levels of apolipoprotein B. N Engl J Med 1990; 323: 1289–98

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Buchwald H, Varco RL, Matts JP, et al. Effect of partial ileal bypass surgery on mortality and morbidity from coronary heart disease in patients with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 1990; 323: 946–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Frick MH, Elo O, Haapa K, et al. Helsinki Heart Study: primary prevention trial with gemfibrozil in middle-aged men with dyslipidemia. Safety of treatment, changes in risk factors and incidence of coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 1237–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1301–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Downs JR, Clearfield M, Weiss S, AFCAPS/TexCAPS Research Group, et al. Primary prevention of acute coronary events with lovastatin in men and women with average cholesterol levels: results of AFCAPS/TexCAPS. JAMA 1998; 279 (20): 1615–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group. Randomized trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. Lancet 1994; 344: 1383–9

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pitt B, Mancini J, Ellis SG, et al. Pravastatin limitation of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries (PLAC-I): reduction in atherosclerosis progression and clinical events. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 26: 1133–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Crouse JB, Byington RP, Bond MG, et al. Pravastatin, lipids, and atherosclerosis in the carotid arteries (PLAC-II). Am J Cardiol 1995; 75: 455–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sacks FM, Pfeffer MA, Moye LA, et al. The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 1001–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Byington RP, Jukema JW, Salonen JT, et al. Reduction in cardiovascular events during pravastatin therapy: pooled analysis of clinical events of the pravastatin atherosclerosis intervention program. Circulation 1995; 92: 2419–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Summary of the second report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. JAMA 1993; 269 (23): 3015–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Freund D, Dittus R. Principles of pharmacoeconomic evaluation of drug therapy. Pharmacoeconomics 1992; 1 (1): 20–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Weinstein M, Stason W. Foundations of cost effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 1977; 296 (13): 716–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. O’Brien B, Rushby J. Outcome assessment in cardiovascular cost-benefit studies. Am Heart J 1990; 119: 740–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kupersmith J, Helmes-Rovner M, Hogan A, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis in heart disease. Pt I: general principles. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1994; 37 (3): 161–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hay J. Reporting pharmacoeconomic model results. Value Health 1998; 1 (3): 187–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Hay JW, Wittels EH, Gotto AM. An economic evaluation of lovastatin for cholesterol lowering and coronary artery disease reduction. Am J Cardiol 1991; 67: 789–96

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Sempos CT, Cleeman JI, Carroll MD, et al. Prevalence of high blood cholesterol among U.S. adults: an update based on guidelines from the second report of the national cholesterol education program adult treatment panel. JAMA 1993; 269: 3009–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Kinosian BP, Eisenberg JM. Cutting into cholesterol: cost-effective alternatives for treating hypercholesterolemia. JAMA 1988; 259: 2249–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Cost-effectiveness of interventions to prevent or treat coronary heart disease. Ann Rev Public Health 1985; 6: 41–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Schulman KA, Kinosian B, Jacobson TA, et al. Reducing high blood cholesterol level with drugs: cost-effectiveness of pharmacologic management. JAMA 1990; 264: 3025–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Oster G, Epstein AM. Cost-effectiveness of antihyperlipidemic therapy in the prevention of coronary heart disease: the case of cholestyramine. JAMA 1987; 258: 2381–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Martens LL, Rutten FF, Erkelens W, et al. Clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of lowering serum cholesterol levels: the case of simvastatin and cholestyramine in the Netherlands. Am J Cardiol 1990; 65: 27F–32F

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Martens LL, Rutten FF. Cost effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapy in the Netherlands. Am J Med 1989; 87 Suppl. 4A: 54S–8S

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Kelley MD. Hypercholesterolemia: the cost of treatment in perspective. South Med J 1990; 83 (12): 1421–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Goldman P, Lee TH, Weinstein MC, Goldman PA, et al. Costeffectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase inhibition for primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. JAMA 1991; 265: 1145–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Hamilton VH, Racicot FE, Zowall H, et al. The cost-effectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors to prevent coronary heart disease. JAMA 1995; 273: 1032–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Martens LL, Guibert R. Cost-effectiveness analysis of lipid modifying therapy in Canada: comparison of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors in the primary prevention of coronary heart disease. Clin Ther 1994; 16 (6): 1052–62

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. WOSCOPS Economic Analysis Group. The West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study: weighing the cost and benefits of primary prevention with pravastatin. BMJ 1997; 315: 1577–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Hay J, Lapuerta P, Yuan Y, et al. Pravastatin cost-effectiveness for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in the United States [abstract]. American Heart Association 70th Scientific Session; 1997 Nov; Orlando

    Google Scholar 

  47. Johannesson M, Borgquist L, Jonsson B, et al. The cost effectiveness of lipid lowering in Swedish primary health care. J Intern Med 1996; 240: 23–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for economic evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  49. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, et al. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Can Med Assoc J 1992; 146 (4): 473–81

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM, et al. Cost effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1995; 332: 1418–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Tengs TO, Adams ME, Pliskin JS, et al. Five hundred life-saving interventions and their cost-effectiveness. Risk Anal 1995; 15 (3): 369–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Dorr AE, Gundersen K, Schneider JC, et al. Colestipol hydrochloride in hypercholesterolemic patients: effect on serum cholesterol and mortality. J Chronic Dis 1978; 31: 5–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Kirby RW, Anderson JW, Sieling B. Oat bran intake selectively lowers serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations. Am J Clin Nutr 1981; 34: 824–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Syam S, Fifer SK. Gemfibrozil cost-benefit study: targeting subgroups for effective hyperlipidemia drug therapy. Drugs 1990; 40 Suppl. 1: 42–52

    Google Scholar 

  55. Perrealt S, Hamilton VH, Lavoie F, et al. A head-to-head comparison of the cost effectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors and fibrates in different types of primary hyperlipidemia. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1996; 10: 787–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Bakker-Arkema RG, Davidson MH, Goldstein RJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of a new HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, atorvastatin, in patients with hypertriglyceridemia. JAMA 1996; 275: 128–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Bischoff H, Angerbauer R, Bender J, et al. Cerivastatin: pharmacology of a novel synthetic and highly active HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor. Atherosclerosis 1997; 135 (1): 119–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Rosenson RS, Tangney CC. Antiatherothrombotic properties of statins: implications for cardiovascular event reduction. JAMA 1998; 279: 1643–50

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Pilote L, Granger C, Armstrong PW, et al. Differences in the treatment of myocardial infarction between the United States and Canada. Med Care 1995; 33 (6): 598–610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Blum CB. Comparison of properties of four inhibitors of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-conenzyme A reductase. Am J Cardiol 1994; 73: 3D–11D

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Conti CR. Economics of lipid lowering with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors [letter]. Clin Cardiol 1995; 18: 60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Roberts WC. Retail costs of the statin lipid-lowering drugs [editorial]. Am J Cardiol 1994; 74: 1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Gotto AM, Hay JW. Cost of lipid-lowering statin drugs [letter]. Am J Cardiol 1996; 77: 226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Ashraf T, Hay JW, Pitt B, et al. Cost-effectiveness of pravastatin in secondary prevention of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1996; 78: 409–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Spearman ME, Summers K, Moore V, et al. Cost-effectiveness of initial therapy with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors to treat hypercholesterolemia in a primary care setting of a managed-care organization. Clin Ther 1997; 19: 582–602

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Koren MJ, Smith DG, Hunninghake DB, et al. The cost of reaching National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Goals in hypercholesterolaemic patients: a comparison of atorvastatin, simvastatin, lovastatin and fluvastatin. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 14 (1): 59–70

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. American Heart Association Annual Meeting. Abstract; 1998 Nov; Dallas (TX)

  68. Tyroler HA. Review of lipid-lowering clinical trials in relation to observational epidemiologic studies. Circulation 1987; 76: 515–22

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Leaverton PE, Sorlie PD, Kleinman JC, et al. Representativeness of the Framingham risk model for coronary heart disease mortality: a comparison with a national cohort study. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 775–84

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Johannesson M, Jonsson B, Kjeksjus J, et al. Cost effectiveness of simvastatin treatment to lower cholesterol levels in patients with coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 332–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Reckless JP. The 4S study and its pharmacoeconomic implications. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 9 (2): 101–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Pedersen TR, Kjekshus J, Berg K, et al. Cholesterol lowering and the use of health care resources: results of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. Circulation 1996; 93: 1796–802

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Jonsson B, Johannesson M, Kjekshus J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol lowering: results from the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Eur Heart J 1996; 17: 1001–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group. Influence of pravastatin and plasma lipids on clinical events in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation 1998; 97 (15): 1440–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Pedersen TR, Olsson AG, Faergeman O, et al. Lipoprotein changes and reduction in the incidence of major coronary heart disease events in the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. Circulation 1998; 97 (15): 1453–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Lennernas H, Fager G. Pharmacodynamics and pharmackinetics of the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors: similarities and differences. Clin Pharmacokinet 1997; 32 (5): 403–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Shepherd J, Park JS. Prevention of heart disease: is LDL reduction the outcome of choice? Value Health 1998; 1 (2): 120–4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Arntzenius AC, Kromhout D, Barth JD, et al. Diet, lipoproteins and the progression of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 805–11

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Ornish D, Brown SE, Scherwitz LW, et al. Can lifestyle changes reverse coronary heart disease? Lancet 1990; 336: 129–33

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Caggiula AW, Watson JE, Kuller LH, et al. Cholesterol-lowering intervention program: effect of the step I diet in community offices practices. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156: 1205–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Haffner SM, Lehto S, Ronnemaa T, et al. Mortality from coronary heart disease in subjects with type 2 diabetes and in nondiabetic subjects with and without prior myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1998; 339 (4): 229–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Bonnette J. Decision making in lipid therapy: a managed care perspective. Value Health. In press

  83. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation 1982; 66 Suppl. III: 56–66

    Google Scholar 

  84. Wong JB, Sonnenberg FA, Salem DN, et al. Myocardial revascularization for chronic stable angina: analysis of the role of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty based on data available in 1989. Ann Intern Med 1990; 113: 852–71

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Goldman L, Sia SB, Cook EF, et al. Costs and effectiveness of routine therapy with long-term beta adrenergic antagonists after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1988; 319: 152–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Hlatky MA, Rogers WJ, Johnstone I, et al. Medical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 92–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Roberts SD, Maxwell DR, Gross TL. Cost-effective care of end-stage renal disease: a billion dollar question [editorial]. Ann Intern Med 1980; 92: 243

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Garner TI, Dardis R. Cost-effectiveness analysis of end-stage renal disease treatments. Med Care 1987; 25: 25–34

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. White CM, Chow M. A review of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. Pharmacist 1998; 1: HS19–28

    Google Scholar 

  90. Boberg M, Angerbauer R, Fey P, et al. Metabolism of cerivastatin by human liver microsomes in vitro. Drug Metab Dispos 1997; 25 (3): 321–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Neuvonen PJ, Kantola T, Kivisto K. Simvastatin but not pravastatin is very susceptible to interaction with the CYP3A4 inhibitor itraconazole. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1998; 63: 332–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Kantola T, Kivisto K, Neuvonen P. Effect of itraconazole on pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1998; 64: 58–65

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Hoes AW, Grobbee DE, Lubsen J, et al. Diuretics, beta-blockers, and the risk for sudden cardiac death in hypertensive patients. Ann Intern Med 1995; 123: 481–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA 1996: 27; 620–5

    Google Scholar 

  95. Nattel S, Arenal A. Antiarrhythmic prophylaxis after acute myocardial infarction: is lidocaine still useful? Drugs 1993; 45 (1): 9–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Hine LK, Laird N, Hewitt P, et al. Meta-analytic evidence against prophylactic use of lidocaine in acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 1989; 149: 2694–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. MacMahon S, Collins R, Peto R, et al. Effects of prophylactic lidocaine in suspected acute myocardial infarction: an overview of results from the randomized, controlled trials. JAMA 1988; 260: 1910–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial investigators. Preliminary report: effect of encainide and flecainide on mortality in a randomized trial of arrhythmia suppression after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1989; 321 (6): 406–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial II investigators. Effect of the antiarrhythmic agent moricizine on survival after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1992; 327 (4): 227–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Connolly HM, Crary JL, Mcgoon MD, et al. Valvular heart disease associated with fenfluramine-phentermine. N Engl J Med 1997; 337 (9): 581–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Goldman L, Weinstein MC, Williams LW. Relative impact of targeted versus population wide cholesterol interventions on the incidence of coronary artery disease: projections of the coronary heart disease policy model. Circulation 1989; 80: 254–60

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Berwick DM, Cretin S, Keeler E. Cholesterol, children and heart disease: an analysis of alternatives. Pediatrics 1981; 68 (5): 721–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, University of Southern California CHP 140, 1540 E. Alcazar St., Los Angeles, California, 90033, USA

    Joel Hay

  2. Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA

    Winnie M. Yu

  3. Pharmacoeconomics PPD Inc, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA

    Talat Ashraf

Authors
  1. Joel Hay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Winnie M. Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Talat Ashraf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joel Hay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hay, J., Yu, W.M. & Ashraf, T. Pharmacoeconomics of Lipid-Lowering Agents for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease. Pharmaeconomics 15, 47–74 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915010-00004

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915010-00004

Keywords

Search

Navigation