Trial reportJournal of human hypertension2006
Cost-effectiveness of losartan-based therapy in patients with hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy: a UK-based economic evaluation of the Losartan Intervention for Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study.
Trial report in Journal of human hypertension, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00338260 (A Triple-Blind, Parallel Study to Investigate the Effect of Losartan Versus Atenolol on the Reduction of Morbidity and Mortality in Hypertensive Patients With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Triple-Blind, Parallel Study to Investigate the Effect of Losartan Versus Atenolol on the Reduction of Morbidity and Mortality in Hypertensive Patients With Left Ventricular Hypertrophy
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic evaluation of irbesartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide in the treatment of hypertension in Greece.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2011Article
- Controlling hypertension immediately post stroke: a cost utility analysis of a pilot randomised controlled trial.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2010Article
- Cost-effectiveness of antihypertensive treatment in patients 80 years of age or older in Switzerland: an analysis of the HYVET study from a Swiss perspective.Journal of human hypertension · 2010Article
- Estimating drug costs in economic evaluations in Ireland and the UK: an analysis of practice and research recommendations.PharmacoEconomics · 2009Review
- Economic benefits of treating high-risk hypertension with angiotensin II receptor antagonists (blockers).Clinical drug investigation · 2008Review
- Candesartan cilexetil: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in chronic heart failure and hypertension.PharmacoEconomics · 2006Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Losartan Intervention for Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study demonstrated the clinical benefit of losartan-based therapy in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), mainly due to a highly significant 25% reduction in the relative risk of stroke compared with an atenolol-based regimen, for a similar reduction in blood pressure. The aim of this economic evaluation was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of losartan compared with atenolol from a UK national health system perspective. Quality-adjusted survival and direct medical costs were modelled beyond the trial using the within-trial incidence of stroke. Survival with stroke, study medication use and quality of life by stroke status were taken directly from the LIFE trial. The LIFE data were supplemented with UK data on lifetime direct medical costs of stroke and life expectancy in individuals without stroke. No additional stroke events or use of study treatment were assumed beyond the trial. Costs and benefits were discounted using current UK Treasury rates. In the base-case analysis, the reduction in stroke-related costs (by 968 sterling pound) offset 86% of the increase in study medication costs (1128 sterling pound) among losartan-treated patients. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for losartan versus atenolol in hypertensive patients with LVH was 2130 sterling pound per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (3195 Euro/QALY), and this increased to 11,352 sterling pound per QALY gained (16,450 Euro/QALY) when the costs of stroke beyond the first 5 years were excluded. Thus, the clinical benefit of losartan was achieved at a cost well within reported thresholds for cost-effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.