Cost–effectiveness of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin vs switching to rosuvastatin therapy in Portugal

Reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) improves clinical outcomes in patients with chronic coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndromes (ACSs). The combination of ezetimibe/simvastatin produces greater reductions in LDL-C compared to simvastatin monotherapy. The IMProved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial (IMPROVE-IT) is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, active-control trial designed to test the hypothesis that the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy, using ezetimibe/simvastatin, will translate into increased clinical benefit on cardiovascular outcomes relative to simvastatin monotherapy in patients with ACS. The study will recruit up to 18,000 moderate- to high-risk patients stabilized after ACS. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to once-daily doses of either ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/40 mg or simvastatin monotherapy 40 mg. Follow-up visits are at 1 and 4 months, and every 4 months thereafter. If consecutive measures of LDL-C are >79 mg/dL at follow-up visits, the simvastatin dose will be increased to 80 mg in a double-blind manner. The primary end point is the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, rehospitalization for unstable angina, coronary revascularization (occurring at least 30 days after randomization), or stroke. Patients will be followed for a minimum of 2.5 years and until at least 5,250 patients experience a primary end point. IMPROVE-IT will determine whether the addition of ezetimibe to statin therapy, using ezetimibe/simvastatin, improves cardiovascular outcomes compared with simvastatin monotherapy in patients after ACS. In addition, the difference in achieved LDL-C levels between the groups will provide data on whether the target for LDL-C lowering should be reduced further.

To measure the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of providing care in a chest pain observation unit compared with routine care for patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain. Cluster randomised controlled trial, with 442 days randomised to the chest pain observation unit or routine care, and cost effectiveness analysis from a health service costing perspective. The emergency department at the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, United Kingdom. 972 patients with acute, undifferentiated chest pain (479 attending on days when care was delivered in the chest pain observation unit, 493 on days of routine care) followed up until six months after initial attendance. The proportion of participants admitted to hospital, the proportion with acute coronary syndrome sent home inappropriately, major adverse cardiac events over six months, health utility, hospital reattendance and readmission, and costs per patient to the health service. Use of a chest pain observation unit reduced the proportion of patients admitted from 54% to 37% (difference 17%, odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.65, P < 0.001) and the proportion discharged with acute coronary syndrome from 14% to 6% (8%, -7% to 23%, P = 0.264). Rates of cardiac event were unchanged. Care in the chest pain observation unit was associated with improved health utility during follow up (0.0137 quality adjusted life years gained, 95% confidence interval 0.0030 to 0.0254, P = 0.022) and a saving of pound 78 per patient (- pound 56 to pound 210, P = 0.252). Care in a chest pain observation unit can improve outcomes and may reduce costs to the health service. It seems to be more effective and more cost effective than routine care.

In a multinational trial (4522IL/0081), we assessed the effects of switching to low doses of rosuvastatin from commonly used doses of atorvastatin, simvastatin, and pravastatin on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement in high-risk patients. Hypercholesterolemic patients (n = 3140) with coronary heart disease, atherosclerosis, or type 2 diabetes were randomized to open-label rosuvastatin 10 mg, atorvastatin 10 or 20 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, or pravastatin 40 mg for 8 weeks. Patients either remained on these treatments for another 8 weeks or switched treatments from atorvastatin 10 mg, simvastatin 20 mg, and pravastatin 40 mg to rosuvastatin 10 mg or from atorvastatin 20 mg to rosuvastatin 10 or 20 mg. The primary efficacy measure was the proportion of patients reaching the Joint European Societies' LDL-C goal (<116 mg/dL) at week 16. For measures of cholesterol goal achievement, treatment arms were compared using logistic-regression analysis. Significant improvement in LDL-C goal achievement was found for patients who switched to rosuvastatin 10 mg, compared with patients who remained on atorvastatin 10 mg (86% vs 80%, P <.05), simvastatin 20 mg (86% vs 72%, P <.0001), and pravastatin 40 mg (88% vs 66%, P <.0001), and between patients switched to rosuvastatin 20 mg and those who remained on atorvastatin 20 mg (90% vs 84%, P <.01). Similar results were found for achievement of the European combined LDL-C and total cholesterol goals and National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III LDL-C goals. All statins were well tolerated over 16 weeks. We demonstrated that switching to a more efficacious statin is an effective strategy to improve lipid goal achievement in patients requiring lipid-lowering therapy.