Authors |
Gaziano TA, Opie LH, Weinstein MC. |
|
Title |
Cardiovascular disease prevention with a multidrug regimen in the developing world: a cost-effectiveness analysis |
|
Full source | Lancet 2006;368:679-86 | |
|
||
|
||
Abstract |
BACKGROUND:
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death, with 80% of cases
occurring in developing countries. We therefore aimed to establish whether
use of evidence-based multidrug regimens for patients at high risk for
cardiovascular disease would be cost-effective in low-income and middle-income
countries. METHODS: We used a Markov model to do a cost-effectiveness
analysis with two combination regimens. For primary prevention, we used
aspirin, a calcium-channel blocker, an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor,
and a statin, and assessed them in four groups with different thresholds
of absolute risks for cardiovascular disease. For secondary prevention,
we assessed the same combination of drugs in one group, but substituted
a beta blocker for the calcium-channel blocker. To compare strategies,
we report incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), in US dollars
per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). FINDINGS: We recorded that preventive
strategies could result in a 2-year gain in life expectancy. Across six
developing World Bank regions, primary prevention yielded ICERs of US746-890
dollars/QALY gained for patients with a 10-year absolute risk of cardiovascular
disease greater than 25%, and 1039-1221 dollars/QALY gained for those
with an absolute risk greater than 5%. ICERs for secondary prevention
ranged from 306 dollars/QALY to 388 dollars/QALY gained. INTERPRETATION:
Regimens of aspirin, two blood-pressure drugs, and a statin could halve
the risk of death from cardiovascular disease in high-risk patients. This
approach is cost-effective according to WHO recommendations, and is robust
across several estimates of drug efficacy and of treatment cost. Developing
countries should encourage the use of these inexpensive drugs that are
currently available for both primary and secondary prevention.se the risk,
contradicts claims of a protective effect of naproxen, and raises serious
questions about the safety of diclofenac, an older drug.
|