Cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin 20 mg for the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality: a Swedish economic evaluation of the JUPITER trial

Abstract

Results indicate that rosuvastatin 20 mg treatment is a cost-effective option vs no-treatment in patients with Framingham CVD risk >20% in Sweden and might even be cost saving if taking a long-term perspective.

Cholesterol-lowering drugs: science and marketing

“…Six studies focused on primary prevention, [21][22][23][24]27,28 five on secondary, 20,25,33,34,37 one on both 35 and the remaining seven on other therapeutic targets -three on subjects with hypercholesterolaemia 31,32,36 and four on patients affected by severe cardiovascular diseases. 26,29,30,38 Fifteen studies analysed therapies with statins alone, [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][30][31][32][34][35][36][37][38] four in combination with other active agents. 25,28,29,33 Only six of the 19 studies took account of statin therapy adherence, 20,24,26,27,30,38 five of the remaining 13 assumed that all patients were fully compliant, 25,29,...…”

“…26,29,30,38 Fifteen studies analysed therapies with statins alone, [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][30][31][32][34][35][36][37][38] four in combination with other active agents. 25,28,29,33 Only six of the 19 studies took account of statin therapy adherence, 20,24,26,27,30,38 five of the remaining 13 assumed that all patients were fully compliant, 25,29,[32][33][34] while three did not mention adherence as an issue. 21,28,36 Only four studies selected took into account the question of resistance to statins in their analyses.…”

“…We searched the PubMed international database to select the full economic evaluations conducted in the European Union countries and focused on statins as cholesterol-lowering drugs. From the 198 articles published in English from July 2006 to June 2016 initially identified, we finally selected and screened 19 articles [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] (see Table 1 and Box 1). a…”

“…Thirteen studies included a cost-utility analysis, [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]29,31,[33][34][35] four studies a cost-effectiveness analysis 28,30,32,36 and the remaining two both the techniques together. 37,38 Seventeen studies took a third-party payer's viewpoint, [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][34][35][36]38 only two a societal perspective 33,37 -one of them without including indirect costs. 30 Eleven of the 13 cost-utility analyses and one of the four cost-effectiveness analyses were based on Markov models 20,22,23,[25][26][27]29,31,[33][34]<...>…”

Improved risk stratification in prevention by use of a panel of selected circulating microRNAs

“…Use of an individualized therapy allows specific treatments of patients and may thereby be beneficial for the patient as well as for the healthcare system 3, 4 . Therefore, identification of patients suitable for specific therapies is of major importance.…”