Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Multi-Country Economic Evaluation of Low-Dose Aspirin in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) is standard care in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The use of low-dose aspirin in primary prevention is not yet fully established, although meta-analyses and US and European guidelines support its use in people at increased risk of CVD. The primary objective of this study was to assess the economic consequences of the use of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD in four European countries (UK, Germany, Spain and Italy).

Methods

Based on results (benefits and harms) reported in meta-analyses, a state-transition model was developed to predict the cost effectiveness of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of CVD. The model consists of five health states: no history of CVD, history of stroke, history of myocardial infarction (MI), history of stroke and MI, and death. A 10-year time horizon and 1-year cycles were used. Secondary prevention data were derived from the aspirin arm of the CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischaemic Events) study.

Direct costs from the public healthcare payer’s perspective were used (€, 2003 values). Effects were expressed in life-years (LY) and QALYs gained. Quality weights were obtained from published data.

Country-specific discounting was applied on effects and costs (3.5% for the UK, 5% for Germany and 3% for Spain and Italy). Univariate sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation were performed to assess uncertainty in the results.

Results

For patients with an annual risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) of 1.5%, the model resulted in 10-year savings with low-dose aspirin of on average €201 (95% CI 81, 331), €281 (95% CI 141, 422), €797 (95% CI 301, 1331) and €427 (95% CI 122, 731) per patient in the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy, respectively. Average total cost was almost 3- to 4-fold higher in Spain and Italy than in the UK and Germany. Savings (non-significant) start in the first year of treatment in all countries.

Sensitivity analyses on cost of complications, utility, discounting, stroke rate and gastrointestinal bleeding rate showed the robustness of the results. From an annual risk of CHD of 0.236% for the UK, 0.324% for Germany, 0.244% for Spain and 0.560% for Italy, low-dose aspirin was cost saving compared with placebo. Monte Carlo analysis showed aspirin dominance in about 97% of cases for the three studied annual risks of CHD (0.6%, 1.0% and 1.5%) in the UK, Germany and Spain. In Italy, aspirin dominance in >95% of cases was seen at annual risks of 1% and 1.5%.

Conclusions

Administering low-dose aspirin to patients with an annual risk of CHD of ≥1% appears to be significantly cost saving from the healthcare payer’s perspective in all countries analysed. Sensitivity analyses (CHD risk and bleedings) suggested the results were robust.

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

Fig. 1
Table I
Table II
Table III
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Table IV
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hayden M, Pignone M, Phillips C, et al. Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 161–172

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Peto R, Gray R, Collins R, et al. Randomised trial of prophylactic daily aspirin in British male doctors. BMJ 1988; 296: 313–316

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Steering Committee of the Physicians’ Health Study Research Group. Final report on the aspirin component of the ongoing Physicians’ Health Study. N Engl J Med 1989; 321: 129–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. The Medical Research Council’s General Practice Research Framework. Thrombosis prevention trial: randomised trial of low-intensity oral anticoagulation with warfarin and low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of ischaemic heart disease in men at increased risk. Lancet 1998; 351: 233–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optima Treatment (HOT) randomised trial. Lancet 1998; 351: 1755–1762

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Collaborative group of the Primary Prevention Project. Lowdose aspirin and vitamin E in people at cardiovascular risk: a randomised trial in general practice. Lancet 2001; 357: 89–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Edelman RS, Herbert PR, Weisman SM, et al. An update on aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Arch Intern Med 2003; 163: 2006–2010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. US Preventive Services Task Force. Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 157–160

    Google Scholar 

  9. Pearson T A, Blair SN, Daniels SR, et al. AHA guidelines for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke: 2002 update. Consensus panel guide to comprehensive risk reduction for adult patients without coronary or other atherosclerotic vascular diseases: American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee. Circulation 2002; 106: 388–391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. De Backer G, Armrosioni E, Borch-Johnsen K, et al. 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 2003; 24: 1601–1610

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Euroaspire Study Group. Lifestyle and risk factor management and use of drug therapies in coronary patients from 15 countries: principal results from Euroaspire II Euro Heart Survey Programme. Eur Heart J 2001; 22: 554–572

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wood D, De Backer G, Faergeman O, et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice: recommendations of the Second Joint Task Force of European and other Societies on Coronary Prevention. Atherosclerosis 1998; 140: 199–270

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Collinson J, Flather MD, Fox KAA, et al. Clinical outcomes, risk stratification and practice patterns of unstable angina and myocardial infarction without ST-elevation: Prospective Registry of Acute Ischaemic Syndromes in the UK (PRAIS-UK). The PRAIS-UK investigators. Eur Heart J 2000; 21: 1450–1457

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. CAPRIE Steering Committee. randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). Lancet 1996; 348: 1329–1339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Department of Health. NHS reference costs [online]. Available from URL: http://www.dh.gov.uk/PolicyAndGuidance/OrganisationPolicylFinanceAndPlanning/NHSreferenceCosts/fs/en [Accessed 2004 Mar]

  16. Clarke P, Gray A, Legood R, et al. The impact of diabetes-related complications on healthcare costs: results from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS Study No. 65). Diabet Med 2003; 20: 442–450

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Personal Social Services Research Unit. Unit costs of health and social care 2003 [online]. Available from URL: http://www.pssm.ac.uk/pdf/uc2003/uc2003_inflation.pdf [Accessed 2004 Mar]

  18. Database of health care costs, Version 1.5. Barcelona:SOIKOS SL, 2004 Jan

  19. Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland [online]. Available from URL: http://www.destatis.de [Accessed2004 Mar]

  20. Levy E, Gabriel S, Dinet J. The comparative medical costs of atherothrombotic disease in European countries. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21: 651–659

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Istatit. Documento non trovato [online]. Available from URL: http://www.istat.it/DATI/Rivalutazi/variaz33.html [Accessed 2004 Mar]

  22. Instituto Nacional de Estadistica [online]. Available from URL: http://www.ine.es/inebase/cgi/um?M=/t25/p138&O=inebase [Accessed 2004 Jan]

  23. British National Formuary [online]. Available from URL: http://www.bnf.org.uk/bnf/ [Accessed2004 Mar]

  24. Official tariffs from Jan 2004 provided by Bayer Healthcare AG

  25. Tsevat J, Goldman L, Soukup JR, et al. Stability of time-trade off utilities in survivors of myocardial infarction. Med Decis Making 1993; 13: 161–165

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tengs TO, Lin TH. A meta-analysis of quality of life estimates for stroke. Pharmacoeconomics 2003; 21: 191–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kuntz KM, Tsevat J, Goldman L, et al. Cost-effectiveness of routine coronary angiography after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 1996; 94: 957–965

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Catherwood E, Fitzpatrick WD, Greenberg ML, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cardioversion and antiarrhythmic therapy in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med 1999; 130: 625–636

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Caro J, Klittich W, McGuire A, et al. The West of Scotland coronary prevention study: economic benefit analysis of primary prevention with pravastatin. BMJ 1997; 315: 1577–1582

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ridker PM, Cook NR, Lee IM, et al. A randomized trial of lowdose aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in women. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1293–1304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was sponsored by an unrestricted grant from Bayer HealthCare AG Germany.

Mark Lamotte contributed to the literature search, model development and report writing. Lieven Annemans contributed to the model development, calculations and report review. Thomas Evers contributed to the literature search and report writing, and is a Bayer AG employee. Maria Kubin contributed to the report review, is a Bayer AG employee and owns some employee stocks.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Health Economics and Disease Management, IMS Health, Rue De Crayer 6, Brussels, 1000, Belgium

    Mark Lamotte (Scientific Director HEDM) & Lieven Annemans

  2. Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Lieven Annemans

  3. Bayer Healthcare AG, Wuppertal, Germany

    Thomas Evers & Maria Kubin

Authors
  1. Mark Lamotte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lieven Annemans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Evers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Maria Kubin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Lamotte.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lamotte, M., Annemans, L., Evers, T. et al. A Multi-Country Economic Evaluation of Low-Dose Aspirin in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease. Pharmacoeconomics 24, 155–169 (2006). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624020-00005

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200624020-00005

Keywords

Search

Navigation