Elsevier

Clinical Therapeutics

Volume 21, Issue 3, March 1999, Pages 536-562
Clinical Therapeutics

A population-based treat-to-target pharmacoeconomic analysis of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors in hypercholesterolemia

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2918(00)88308-3Get rights and content

Abstract

The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors have become the drugs of choice for the treatment of patients with hypercholesterolemia. However, one of the major concerns with these drugs is cost. In an attempt to develop a cost-effective treatment strategy for patients referred to our lipid clinic, we conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the lipid-lowering efficacy of the various HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors alone or in combination with niacin or cholestyramine. Based on cholesterollowering efficacy estimates derived from a literature-based meta-analysis, we performed a population-based treat-to-target analysis. Fifty-six trials with 101 monotherapy cohorts and 20 trials with 31 combination-therapy cohorts (573 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Based on reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), the most effective monotherapy was atorvastatin and the least effective monotherapy was fluvastatin. Combination therapy was more effective in reducing LDL-C than monotherapy with the respective HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor. However, on the basis of dollars spent per percentage of LDL-C reduction, combination therapy was frequently less cost-effective than monotherapy. In addition, combination therapy was associated with a higher rate of noncompliance and a greater risk of drug-drug interactions. As a result, we based our treat-to-target analysis on the use of monotherapy as first-line treatment, with combination therapy reserved for patients failing to achieve the target LDL-C levels of the US National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel II (NCEP ATP-II) with monotherapy. In the population-based treat-to-target analysis, atorvastatin was the most cost-effective drug for high-risk patients (those with coronary heart disease [CHD]), whereas fluvastatin was the most cost-effective agent for low-risk patients (<2 risk factors for CHD) and moderate-risk patients (≥2 risk factors for CHD). If 1 drug is chosen to treat all patients (ie, in cases of formulary restriction), atorvastatin would be the most cost-effective agent. In adapting the findings on cholesterol-lowering efficacy from this analysis to our lipid clinic, we concluded that the most cost-effective treatment approach is to individualize the selection of an HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor based on both coronary risk and the LDL-C reduction required to achieve NCEP ATP-II goals. Based on our results, 2 agents-atorvastatin and fluvastatin—should be available on the formulary.

References (114)

  • DartA et al.

    A multicenter, double-blind, 1 year study comparing the safety and efficacy of once daily atorvastatin with that of simvastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia

    Am J Cardiol

    (1997)
  • BertoliniS et al.

    Efficacy and safety of atorvastatin compared to pravastatin in patients with hypercholesterolemia

    Atherosclerosis

    (1997)
  • DavidsonM et al.

    The efficacy and six-week tolerability of simvastatin 80 and 160 mg/day

    Am J Cardiol

    (1997)
  • BardJ et al.

    Comparison of the effect of fluvastatin, an hydroxymethyl glutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor, and cholestyramine, a bile acid sequestrant, on lipoprotein particles defined by apolipoprotein composition

    Metabolism

    (1995)
  • WiklundO et al.

    Pravastatin and gemfibrozil alone and in combination for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia

    Am J Med

    (1993)
  • JacototB et al.

    Comparison of fluvastatin versus pravastatin treatment of primary hypercholesterolemia

    Am J Cardiol

    (1995)
  • DavignonJ et al.

    Comparative efficacy and safety of pravastatin, nicotinic acid and the two combined in patients with hypercholesterolemia

    Am J Cardiol

    (1994)
  • JacobsonTA et al.

    Fluvastatin with and without niacin for hypercholesterolemia

    Am J Cardiol

    (1994)
  • JacototB et al.

    Longterm efficacy with fluvastatin as monotherapy and combined with cholestyramine (a 156 week multicenter study)

    Am J Cardiol

    (1995)
  • OjalaJ et al.

    Long-term maintenance of therapeutic response to lovastatin in patients with familial and non-familial hypercholesterolemia: A 3-year follow-up

    Atherosclerosis

    (1990)
  • GouldAL et al.

    Cholesterol reduction yields clinical benefit

    Circulation

    (1998)
  • GottoAM

    Lipid lowering regression coronary events. A review of the Interdisciplinary Council on Lipids and Cardiovascular Risk Intervention, 7th Council Meeting

    Circulation

    (1995)
  • RossouwJ et al.

    The value of lowering cholesterol after myocardial infarction

    NEJM

    (1990)
  • LipidResearch Clinics Program. The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial results. I

    Reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease

    JAMA

    (1984)
  • Lipid Research Clinics Program

    The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial results. II. The relationship of reduction in incidence of coronary heart disease to cholesterol lowering

    JAMA

    (1984)
  • FrickM 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

    JAMA

    (1987)
  • PedersenT et al.

    Randomized trial of cholesterol-lowering in 4,444 patients with coronary heart disease: The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S)

    Lancet

    (1994)
  • SacksF et al.

    The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. Cholesterol and Recurrent Events Trial investigators

    NEJM

    (1996)
  • ShepherdJ et al.

    Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group

    NEJM

    (1995)
  • National Cholesterol Education Program

    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 (Adult Treatment Panel II)

    JAMA

    (1993)
  • American College of Physicians

    Guidelines for using serum cholesterol, highdensity lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglyceride levels as screening tests for preventing coronary heart disease in adults

    Ann Intern Med

    (1996)
  • LaRosaJ

    Cholesterol agonistics

    Ann Intern Med

    (1996)
  • EpsteinR et al.

    The cholesterol population model: US population requirements for treatment of hypercholesterolemia

    Am J Managed Care

    (1996)
  • MarceilnoJ et al.

    Inadequate treatment with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors by health care providers

    Am J Med

    (1996)
  • SchectmanG et al.

    Dose-response characteristics of cholesterol-lowering drug therapies: Implications for treatment

    Ann Intern Med

    (1996)
  • RecklessJ

    Cost-effectiveness of hypolipidaemic drugs

    Postgrad Med J

    (1993)
  • JohannessonM et al.

    The cost of screening for hypercholesterolaemia-results from a clinical trial in Swedish primary health care

    Scand J Clin Lab Invest

    (1993)
  • FieldK et al.

    Strategies for reducing coronary risk factors in primary care: Which is most cost effective?

    BMJ

    (1995)
  • KuntzK et al.

    Cost-effectiveness of accepted measures for intervention in coronary heart disease

    Coron Artery Dis

    (1995)
  • HunninghakeD et al.

    The efficacy of dietary therapy alone or combined with lovastatin in outpatients with hypercholesterolemia

    NEJM

    (1993)
  • CaggiulaA et al.

    Cholesterol-lowering intervention program: Effect of the Step I diet in community practice

    Arch Intern Med

    (1996)
  • JohnsonC et al.

    Declining serum total cholesterol levels among US adults: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys

    JAMA

    (1993)
  • HuedebertG et al.

    Combination drug therapy for hypercholesterolemia. The trade-off between cost and simplicity

    Arch Intern Med

    (1993)
  • OsterG et al.

    CholesterolReduction Intervention Study: A randomized trial to assess effectiveness and costs in clinical practice

    Arch Intern Med

    (1996)
  • Price-ChekPC

    TM Average Wholesale Prices

    (1998)
  • BradfordR et al.

    Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) Study results. I. Efficacy in modifying plasma lipoproteins and adverse event profile in 8245 patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia

    Arch Intern Med

    (1991)
  • VegaG et al.

    Pravastatin therapy in primary moderate hypercholesterolemia: Changes in metabolism of apolipoprotein B-containing lipoproteins

    J Intern Med

    (1990)
  • CapursoA et al.

    Lipid control with low-dosage simvastatin in patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia. An Italian multicentre doubleblind placebo-controlled study

    Eur Heart J

    (1992)
  • McDowellI et al.

    Simvastatin in severe hypercholesterolemia: A placebo controlled trial

    Br J Clin Pharmacol

    (1991)
  • PetersT et al.

    Efficacy safety of fluvastatin in hypertensive patients. An analysis of a clinical trial database

    Am J Hypertens

    (1993)
  • Cited by (30)

    • Stem-bark of Terminalia arjuna attenuates human monocytic (THP-1) and aortic endothelial cell activation

      2013, Journal of Ethnopharmacology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Hypolipidaemic and antioxidant nature of TA-stem bark has been reported in animal models (Tiwari et al., 1990, Shaila et al., 1998; Gauthaman et al., 2001; Gupta et al., 2001; Verma and Vinaya, 2009). In the present study, both the extracts of TA-stem (TAAE and TAWE) were found to inhibit the activity of HMG-CoA reductase (Fig. 3), a key enzyme in sterol biosynthesis and often targeted for developing cholesterol lowering drugs (Daniel et al., 1999). In view of proinflammatory nature of lypolysis products generated from very low density lipoproteins (Higgins and Rutledge, 2009; Tetali et al., 2010), the inhibition of LpL is desirable.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text