Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Cost-Effectiveness of Fluvastatin in Hungary Following Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

  • Pharmaco-Economics
  • Published:
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The Lescol Intervention Prevention Study (LIPS) showed substantial gains in health outcomes from statins following PCI. That study was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial undertaken in 77 centres, predominantly in Europe, of patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia who had undergone their first PCI. The evidence on cost-effectiveness has been established for the UK, USA and the Netherlands, but due to different health system cost structures, the results may not be applicable to other European countries. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin used following first PCI in Hungary.

Materials and methods

A deterministic Markov model was used to estimate the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year gained, with cost data drawn from the Hungarian National Health Insurance Fund. Effectiveness data on fluvastatin was derived directly from LIPS and utility weights from previous studies on heart disease. Sensitivity analyses were conducted around key parameters and analyses were conducted for subgroups identified in LIPS.

Results

Treatment with fluvastatin cost an additional €1,704 and resulted in an additional 0.107 QALYs per patient discounted over 10-years compared with controls. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained was €15,910. The key determinants of cost-effectiveness were the effectiveness of fluvastatin, utility weights, cost of fluvastatin, and the time horizon evaluated. Fluvastatin was substantially more cost-effective in patients with diabetes, renal disease, multi-vessel disease or LDL-cholesterol >3.4 mmol/l.

Conclusions

Fluvastatin is an economically efficient pharmaceutical for reducing heart disease in Hungary and other European countries in patients following PCI.

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. OECD Secretariate. & Institut de Recherche et d’Etude en Economie de la Sante. OECD Health Data 2005. OECD Health Division, Paris; 2005.

  2. National Statistical Office. Aging population in Hungary. Budapest: National Statistical Office; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  3. anon. Congress of Cardiology. in Congress of Cardiology, Balatonfüred, 2005.

  4. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Health technology appraisal–review of coronary artery stents and appraisal of drug eluting stents. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002;360(9326):7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Shepherd J. Preventing coronary artery disease in the West of Scotland: implications for primary prevention. Am J Cardiol 1998;82(10B):57T–59T.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, et al. West of Scotland coronary prevention study group. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 1995;333(20):1301–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Pedersen TR, Berg K, Cook TJ, et al. Safety and tolerability of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin during 5 years in the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. Arch Intern Med 1996;156(18):2085.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hague W, Forder P, Simes J, Hunt D, Tonkin A. LIPID I. Effect of pravastatin on cardiovascular events and mortality in 1516 women with coronary heart disease: results from the Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) study. Am Heart J 2003;145(4):643–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Flaker GC, Warnica JW, Sacks FM, et al. Pravastatin prevents clinical events in revascularized patients with average cholesterol concentrations. Cholesterol and Recurrent Events CARE Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;34(1):106–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Serruys PW, de Feyter P, Macaya C, et al. Fluvastatin for prevention of cardiac events following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;287(24):3215–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Scuffham PA, Chaplin S. An economic evaluation of fluvastatin used for the prevention of cardiac events following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention in the UK. Pharmacoecon 2004;22(8):525–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chaplin S, Scuffham PA, Alon M, van den Boom G. Secondary prevention after PCI: the cost-effectiveness of statin therapy in the Netherlands. Netherlands Heart Journal 2004;12(7/8):331–6.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Delea T, Jacobson T, Serruys P, Edelsberg J, Oster G. Cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention. Ann Pharmacother 2005;39:610–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. TreeAge Software Inc. TreeAge pro. TreeAge Software Inc., Williamstown, Massachusetts, 2005.

  16. Cleland JG, Walker A. Is medical treatment for angina the most cost-effective option? Eur Heart J 1997;18 Suppl B:B35–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Cleland JG, Walker A. Therapeutic options and cost considerations in the treatment of ischemic heart disease. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 1998;12 Suppl 3:225–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pharoah PD, Hollingworth W. Cost effectiveness of lowering cholesterol concentration with statins in patients with and without pre-existing coronary heart disease: life table method applied to health authority population. BMJ 1996;312(7044):1443–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Troche CJ, Tacke J, Hinzpeter B, Danner M, Lauterbach KW. Cost-effectiveness of primary and secondary prevention in cardiovascular diseases. Eur Heart J 1998;19 Suppl C:C59–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov models in medical decision making: a practical guide. Med Decis Mak 1993;13:322–38.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Melsop KA, Boothroyd DB, Hlatky MA. Quality of life and time trade-off utility measures in patients with coronary artery disease. Am Heart J 2003;145(1):36–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 2001;344(15):1117–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Greiner W, Weijen T, Nieuwenhuizen M, et al. A single European currency for EQ-5D health states—results from a six-country study. European Journal of Health Economics 2003;4 (3):222–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. National Health Insurance Fund of Hungary. National Health Insurance Fund Database. Budapest. www.oep.hu, 2005.

  25. Eastaugh J, Calvert M, Freemantle N. Highlighting the need for better patient care in stable angina: results of the international Angina Treatment Patterns (ATP) Survey in 7074 patients. Fam Pract 2005;22:43–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pharmindex database, Hungary. Budapest, 2005.

  27. Ballantyne C, Pazzucconi F, Pinto X, Reckless J, Stein E, McKenney Jea. Efficacy and tolerability of fluvastatin extended-release delivery system: a pooled analysis. Clin Ther 2001;23:177–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lipid-lowering drugs in Hungary. IMS Health Database (www.imshealth.com), 2005.

  29. Schaefer EJ, McNamara JR, Tayler T, et al. Comparisons of effects of statins (atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin) on fasting and postprandial lipoproteins in patients with coronary heart disease versus control subjects. Am J Cardiol 2004;93(1):31–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Jones P, Kafonek S, Laurora I, Hunninghake D. Comparative dose efficacy study of atorvastatin versus simvastatin, pravastatin, lovastatin, and fluvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia (the CURVES study)[erratum appears in Am J Cardiol 1998 Jul 1;82(1):128]. Am J Cardiol 1998;81(5):582–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Szende A, Mogyorosy Z, Muszbek N, Nagy J, Pallos G, Dozsa C. Methodological guidelines for economic evaluation of healthcare interventions in Hungary: a Hungarian proposal for methodology standards. Eur J Health Economics 2002;3:196–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford:Oxford University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Caro J, Klittich W, McGuire A, et al. The West of Scotland coronary prevention study: economic benefit analysis or primary prevention with prevastatin. BMJ 1997;315:1577–82.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Huse DM, Russell MW, Miller JD, et al. Cost-effectiveness of statins. Am J Cardiol 1998;82:1357–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Prosser LA, Stinnett AA, Glodman PA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol-lowering therapies according to selected patient characteristics. Ann Intern Med 2000;132(10):769–79.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. van Hout BA, Simoons ML. Cost-effectiveness of HMG coenzyme reductase inhibitors—whom to treat? Eur Heart J 2001;22:751–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Final appraisal determination—coronary artery stents. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Department of Health. Hospital episode statistics 2001–2002. In Internet Vol. 2003. London: Department of Health; 2002.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia

    Paul A. Scuffham

  2. York Health Economics Consortium Ltd, University of York, York, UK

    Paul A. Scuffham

  3. Novartis Hungary Ltd., Budapest, Hungary

    József Kósa

Authors
  1. Paul A. Scuffham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. József Kósa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul A. Scuffham.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Scuffham, P.A., Kósa, J. The Cost-Effectiveness of Fluvastatin in Hungary Following Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 20, 309–317 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-006-8877-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-006-8877-3

Key words

Search

Navigation