In the LIPS (Lescol Intervention Prevention Study), fluvastatin 80 mg/day reduced the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) by 22% versus placebo (p = 0.01) following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with stable or unstable angina or silent ischemia. The cost-effectiveness of such therapy is unknown.
OBJECTIVE:
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin following successful first PCI from a US healthcare system perspective.
METHODS:
We used a Markov model to estimate expected outcomes and costs of 2 alternative treatment strategies following successful first PCI in patients with stable or unstable angina or silent ischemia: (1) diet/lifestyle counseling plus immediate fluvastatin 80 mg/day; and (2) diet/lifestyle counseling only, with initiation of fluvastatin 80 mg/day following occurrence of future nonfatal MACE. The model was estimated with data from LIPS and other published sources. Cost-effectiveness was calculated as the ratio of the difference in expected medical-care costs to the expected difference in life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) alternatively.
RESULTS:
Treatment with fluvastatin following successful first PCI was found to increase life expectancy by 0.78 years (QALYs 0.68). Cost-effectiveness of fluvastatin following successful first PCI is $13 505 per LY ($15 454 per QALY) saved. Ratios are lower for patients with diabetes ($9396 per LY; $10 718 per QALY) and those with multivessel disease ($9662 per LY; $11 076 per QALY). Findings were robust with respect to changes in key model parameters and assumptions.
CONCLUSIONS:
Fluvastatin therapy following PCI is cost-effective compared with other generally accepted medical interventions.
SerruysPWde FeyterPJBenghoziRHugenholtzPGLesaffreE.The Lescol Intervention Prevention Study (LIPS): A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of the long-term effects of fluvastatin after successful transcatheter therapy in patients with coronary heart disease. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent2001;4: 165–72.
2.
SerruysPWde FeyterPMacayaCKokottNPuelJVrolixM, for the Lescol Intervention Prevention Study (LIPS) Investigators. Fluvastatin for prevention of cardiac events following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA2002;287: 3215–22.
3.
Expert Panel on the Detection and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive Summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NEP) Expert Panel on the Detection and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III or ATP III). JAMA2001;285: 2486–97.
4.
FonarowGC. In-hospital initiation of cardiovascular protective medications for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Taking advantage of the teachable moment. J Invasive Cardiol2003;15: 646–52.
5.
SonnenbergFABeckJR. Markov models in medical decision making: A practical guide. Med Decis Making1993;13: 322–38.
6.
BertrandMEMcFaddenEPFruchartJCVan BelleECommeauPGrollierG, for the PREDICT Trial Investigators. Effect of pravastatin on angiographic restenosis after coronary balloon angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol1997;30: 863–9.
7.
WeintraubWSBoccuzziSJKleinJLKosinskiASKingSB3rdIvan-HoeR, for the Lovastatin Restenosis Trial Study Group. Lack of effect of lovastatin on restenosis after coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med1994;331: 1331–7.
8.
SerruysPWFoleyDPJacksonGBonnierHMacayaCVrolixMA randomized placebo-controlled trial of fluvastatin for prevention of restenosis after successful coronary balloon angioplasty: Final results of the Fluvastatin Angiographic Restenosis (FLARE) trial. Eur Heart J1999;20: 58–69.
9.
GoldMRSiegerJRRussellLB, eds. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
10.
AbbottRD. Logistic regression in survival analysis. Am J Epidemiol1985;121: 465–71.
11.
CupplesLAD'AgostinoRBAndersonKKannelWB. Comparison of baseline and repeated measure covariate techniques in the Framingham Heart Study. Stat Med1988;7: 205–22.
12.
D'AgostinoRBLeeMLBelangerAJCupplesLAAndersonKKannelWB. Relation of pooled logistic regression to time dependent Cox regression analysis: The Framingham Heart Study. Stat Med1990;9: 1501–15.
13.
PfefferMASacksFMMoyeLABrownLRouleauJLHartleyLH, for the Cholesterol and Recurrent Events Trial Investigators. The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med1996;335: 1001–9.
14.
Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers. Washington, DC: US Dept of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2003. http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost (accessed 2003 May 13).
15.
2003 Drug topics redbook update. Montvale, NJ: Thomson PDR, 2003.
16.
BadawiSConvingtonTR, eds. Pharmacy reimbursement rates stabilize. Academy of Managed Care Providers News2001;3(1):2.
17.
Study of Medi-Cal Pharmacy Reimbursement. Prepared for the California Department of Health Services, Sacramento, California. Topeka, KS: Myers and Stauffer LC. 2002. www.cpha.com/CA_report_DISP.pdf (accessed 2003 July 11).
18.
BallantyneCMPazzucconiFPintoXRecklessJPSteinEMcKenneyJEfficacy and tolerability of fluvastatin extended-release delivery system: A pooled analysis. Clin Ther2001;23: 177–92.
19.
Prescribing information. Lescol (fluvastatin sodium) capsules and Lescol XL (fluvastatin sodium) extended-release tablets. East Hanover, NJ: Novartis Pharmaceuticals, August 2002.
20.
RussellMWHuseDMDrownsSHamelECHartzSC. Direct medical care costs of coronary artery disease in the United States. Am J Cardiol1998;81: 1110–5.
21.
GrayWACaponeRJMostAS. Unsuccessful emergency medical resuscitation-are continued efforts in the emergency department justified?N Engl J Med1991;325: 1393–8.
22.
Agency for Health Care Research and Quality. The HCUP-3 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2000, CD -ROM. Springfield, VA: National Technical Information Service, 1997.
23.
Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. 2000 Prospective Payment System (PPS)-Payment Impact File. www.cms.gov/providers/pufdownload (accessed 2003 May 13).
24.
GrinesCLMarsaleseDLBrodieBGriffinJDonohueBCostantiniCRSafety and cost-effectiveness of early discharge after primary angioplasty in low risk patients with acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol1998;31: 967–72.
25.
HlatkyMARogersWJJohnstoneIBoothroydDBrooksMMPittBMedical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med1997;336: 92–9.
26.
WeintraubWSBeckerERMauldinPDCullerSKosinskiASKingSB3rd.Cost of revascularization over eight years in the randomized and eligible patients in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). Am J Cardiol2000;86: 747–52.
27.
SegalMJHealdRB, eds. Medicare RBRVS: the physicians' guide 1995. Chicago: American Medical Association, 1995.
28.
St. Anthony's complete RBRVS. Reston, VA: St. Anthony's Publishing, 2002.
29.
MelsopKABoothroydDBHlatkyMA. Quality of life and time trade-off utility measures in patients with coronary artery disease. Am Heart J2003;145: 36–41.
30.
SerruysPWUngerFSousaJEJateneABonnierHJSchonbergerJP, for the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study Group. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med2001;344: 1117–24.
31.
GlasziouPPBromwichSSimesJ, for the AUS-TASK Group. Quality of life six months after myocardial infarction treated with thrombolytic therapy. Med J Aust1994;116: 532–6.
32.
RawlesJLightJWattM.Quality of life in the first 100 days after suspected acute myocardial infarction-a suitable trial endpoint?J Epidemiol Commun Health1992;46: 612–6.
33.
EfronBTibhiraniR.An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1993.
34.
LothgrenMZethraeusN.Definition, interpretation and calculation of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ2000;9: 623–30.
35.
KuntzKMLeeTH. Cost-effectiveness of accepted measures for intervention in coronary heart disease. Coron Artery Dis1995;6: 472–8.
36.
HirthRAChernewMEMillerEFendrickAMWeissertWG. Willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year: In search of a standard. Med Decis Making2000;20: 332–42.
37.
JacobsonTAScheinJRWilliamsonABallantyneCM. Maximizing the cost-effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy. Arch Intern Med1998;158: 1977–89.
38.
WeintraubWSMahoneyEMGhazzalZMKingSB3rdCullerSDMorrisDCTrends in outcome and costs of coronary intervention in the 1990s. Am J Cardiol2001;88: 497–503.
39.
ReynoldsMRNeilNHoKKBerezinRCosgroveRSLagerRAClinical and economic outcomes of multivessel coronary stenting compared with bypass surgery: A single-center US experience. Am Heart J2003;145: 334–42.
40.
PetersonEDCowperPADeLongERZidarJPStackRSMarkDB. Acute and long-term cost implications of coronary stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol1999;33: 1610–8.
41.
SaiaFde FeyterPSerruysPWLemosPAArampatzisCAHendrickxGR, for the Lescol Intervention Prevention Study (LIPS) Investigators. Effect of fluvastatin on long-term outcome after coronary revascularization with stent implantation. Am J Cardiol2004;93: 92–5.
42.
MoriceMCSerruysPWSousaJEFajadetJBan HayashiEPerinM, for the RAVEL Study Group. Randomized study with the sirolimus-coated Bx velocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med2002;346: 1773–80.
43.
MoriceMCParkSJShimWHHoDSRaiznerAEParkSWA paclitaxel-eluting stent for the prevention of coronary restenosis. N Engl J Med2003;348: 1537–45.
