Cargando…

Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND: The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommended either no statin therapy or moderate-intensity statin therapy (MST) for intermediate risk patients—those with 5–7.5% 10-year risk and without cardiovascular disease (CVD), hypercholesterolemia or diabetes. The guideline further suggested that the th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shiffman, Dov, Arellano, Andre R., Caulfield, Michael P., Louie, Judy Z., Bare, Lance A., Devlin, James J., Melander, Olle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5142314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27927162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-016-0429-6
_version_ 1782472748233129984
author Shiffman, Dov
Arellano, Andre R.
Caulfield, Michael P.
Louie, Judy Z.
Bare, Lance A.
Devlin, James J.
Melander, Olle
author_facet Shiffman, Dov
Arellano, Andre R.
Caulfield, Michael P.
Louie, Judy Z.
Bare, Lance A.
Devlin, James J.
Melander, Olle
author_sort Shiffman, Dov
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommended either no statin therapy or moderate-intensity statin therapy (MST) for intermediate risk patients—those with 5–7.5% 10-year risk and without cardiovascular disease (CVD), hypercholesterolemia or diabetes. The guideline further suggested that the therapy choice be based on patient-clinician discussions of risks and benefits. Since low-density lipoprotein particle (LDL-P) levels were reported to be associated with CVD independently of traditional risk factors in intermediate and low risk patients, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of using LDL-P levels to identify intermediate risk patients likely to benefit from initiating or intensifying statin therapy. METHODS: We evaluated 5 care strategies for intermediate risk patients. These included the strategies suggested by the guideline: no-statin therapy and MST. We compared each of these strategies to a related strategy that incorporated LDL-P testing. No-statin therapy was compared with the strategy of MST for those with high LDL-P levels and no statin therapy for all other patients (test-and-MST). MST was compared with the strategy of high-intensity statin therapy (HST) for those with high LDL-P levels and MST for all other patients (test-and-HST). We also evaluated the strategy of HST for all. Costs (payer perspective) and utilities were assessed over a 5-year time horizon in a Markov model of 100,000 hypothetical intermediate risk patients. RESULTS: HST dominated all other strategies, costing less and—despite causing 739 more cases of diabetes than did MST—resulting in more quality adjusted life-years (QALYs). For patient-clinician discussions that would otherwise lead to the MST strategy, we found the test-and-HST strategy reduced costs by $4.67 MM and resulted in 134 fewer CVD events and 115 additional QALYs. For patient-clinician discussions that would otherwise lead to no statin therapy, we found that the test-and-MST strategy reduced costs by $3.25 MM, resulted in 97 fewer CVD events and 44 additional QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: The HST strategy was cost saving and improved outcomes in intermediate risk patients. For patient and clinicians concerned about the adverse events associated with HST, using LDL-P levels to target intensified statin therapy could improve outcomes and reduce costs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-016-0429-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5142314
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51423142016-12-15 Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis Shiffman, Dov Arellano, Andre R. Caulfield, Michael P. Louie, Judy Z. Bare, Lance A. Devlin, James J. Melander, Olle BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommended either no statin therapy or moderate-intensity statin therapy (MST) for intermediate risk patients—those with 5–7.5% 10-year risk and without cardiovascular disease (CVD), hypercholesterolemia or diabetes. The guideline further suggested that the therapy choice be based on patient-clinician discussions of risks and benefits. Since low-density lipoprotein particle (LDL-P) levels were reported to be associated with CVD independently of traditional risk factors in intermediate and low risk patients, we investigated the cost-effectiveness of using LDL-P levels to identify intermediate risk patients likely to benefit from initiating or intensifying statin therapy. METHODS: We evaluated 5 care strategies for intermediate risk patients. These included the strategies suggested by the guideline: no-statin therapy and MST. We compared each of these strategies to a related strategy that incorporated LDL-P testing. No-statin therapy was compared with the strategy of MST for those with high LDL-P levels and no statin therapy for all other patients (test-and-MST). MST was compared with the strategy of high-intensity statin therapy (HST) for those with high LDL-P levels and MST for all other patients (test-and-HST). We also evaluated the strategy of HST for all. Costs (payer perspective) and utilities were assessed over a 5-year time horizon in a Markov model of 100,000 hypothetical intermediate risk patients. RESULTS: HST dominated all other strategies, costing less and—despite causing 739 more cases of diabetes than did MST—resulting in more quality adjusted life-years (QALYs). For patient-clinician discussions that would otherwise lead to the MST strategy, we found the test-and-HST strategy reduced costs by $4.67 MM and resulted in 134 fewer CVD events and 115 additional QALYs. For patient-clinician discussions that would otherwise lead to no statin therapy, we found that the test-and-MST strategy reduced costs by $3.25 MM, resulted in 97 fewer CVD events and 44 additional QALYs. CONCLUSIONS: The HST strategy was cost saving and improved outcomes in intermediate risk patients. For patient and clinicians concerned about the adverse events associated with HST, using LDL-P levels to target intensified statin therapy could improve outcomes and reduce costs. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-016-0429-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC5142314/ /pubmed/27927162 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-016-0429-6 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Shiffman, Dov
Arellano, Andre R.
Caulfield, Michael P.
Louie, Judy Z.
Bare, Lance A.
Devlin, James J.
Melander, Olle
Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_fullStr Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full_unstemmed Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_short Use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
title_sort use of low density lipoprotein particle number levels as an aid in statin treatment decisions for intermediate risk patients: a cost-effectiveness analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5142314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27927162
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-016-0429-6
work_keys_str_mv AT shiffmandov useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT arellanoandrer useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT caulfieldmichaelp useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT louiejudyz useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT barelancea useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT devlinjamesj useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis
AT melanderolle useoflowdensitylipoproteinparticlenumberlevelsasanaidinstatintreatmentdecisionsforintermediateriskpatientsacosteffectivenessanalysis