When one is greater than two
- PDF / 124,105 Bytes
- 1 Pages / 623.591 x 841.847 pts Page_size
- 111 Downloads / 225 Views
More support for amlodipine + atorvastatin In a similar vein, ASCOT investigators show that treating hypertensive patients with ≥ 3 additional CV risk factors, who are not deemed candidates for lipidlowering therapy, with amlodipine and atorvastatin meets the cost-effectiveness threshold set by the UK National Institute of Clinical Excellence.2 Modelling the ASCOT data shows that amlodipine + atorvastatin is more costly relative to atenolol + atorvastatin, atenolol alone or amlodipine alone but is associated with improved survival and quality-adjusted survival. Amlodipine + atorvastatin costs £14 542 and £7746 per QALY gained versus monotherapy with atenolol or amlodipine, respectively, and £15 280 per QALY gained versus atenolol + atorvastatin.** * 4-year primary coronary heart disease and stroke events data from the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT)–LipidLowering Arm, and costs from the payer perspective (2006 values) ** costs based on resource consumption recorded during the trial; utility values from ASCOT substudy 1. Smith TW, et al. Clinical and economic consequences of a single-pill combination of amlodipine/atorvastatin compared with a two-pill regimen in hypertensive patients with additional cardiovascular risk factors. European Heart Journal 28 (Abstr. Suppl.): 857 (plus poster) abstr. P4800, Sep 2007. 2. Lindgren P, et al. Amlodipine + atorvastatin is cost-effective compared to atenolol + atorvastatin, amlodipine or atenolol alone: the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial (ASCOT). European Heart Journal 28 (Abstr. Suppl.): 857, Sep 2007. 801069957
1173-5503/10/0537-0001/$14.95 Adis © 2010 Springer International Publishing AG. All rights reserved
PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 22 Sep 2007 No. 537
1
Data Loading...
