Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19898698›Full record

Trial reportThe Canadian journal of cardiology2009

Economic evaluation of high-dose (80 mg/day) atorvastatin treatment compared with standard-dose (20 mg/day to 40 mg/day) simvastatin treatment in Canada based on the Incremental Decrease in End-Points Through Aggressive Lipid-Lowering (IDEAL) trial.

M Wagner, P Lindgren, E Merikle, M Goetghebeur, B Jönsson

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Canadian journal of cardiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.

M WagnerBioMedCom Consultants Inc., 1405 TransCanada Highway, Suite 310, Montreal, Quebec H9P 2V9. monika_wagner@biomedcom.org
P Lindgren
E Merikle
M Goetghebeur
B Jönsson
Biocom · USEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control · SEPfizer (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Incremental Decrease in End-Points Through Aggressive Lipid-Lowering (IDEAL) trial demonstrated incremental cardiovascular benefit of treatment with high-dose atorvastatin (80 mg/ day) versus standard-dose simvastatin (20 mg/day to 40 mg/day) in 8888 patients with a previous myocardial infarction (MI) over a median follow-up period of 4.8 years.

objectivesTo assess the cost-effectiveness of high-dose atorvastatin versus standard-dose simvastatin treatment in patients with a history of MI from a Canadian societal perspective.

methodsIn a within-trial analysis, end point-related events, resources used and productivity losses occurring during the IDEAL trial were aggregated by treatment arm on an intention-to-treat basis to calculate the incremental cost per event avoided. Additionally, quality-adjusted survival was projected using a lifetime Markov model. Transition probabilities, workdays lost, use of study medication and cardiovascular hospitalization rates were based on IDEAL trial data. Hospitalization, study medication and productivity costs were included. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed.

resultsCompared with standard-dose simvastatin, atorvastatin 80 mg led to 0.099 fewer events per patient and cost savings over 4.8 years of treatment. Over a lifetime horizon, atorvastatin 80 mg led to 0.023 qualityadjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient at an incremental cost of $26,795/QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained below $50,000/QALY in 78% of 1000 simulations. Exclusion of indirect costs resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $38,834/QALY. Results were relatively sensitive to baseline age, but robust with respect to sex, baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, diabetes status and hospitalization costs.

conclusionFrom a Canadian societal perspective, high-dose atorvastatin is cost-effective compared with standard-dose simvastatin in patients with a previous MI.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsAdministration, OralAgedAged, 80 and overAtorvastatinCanadaCardiovascular DiseasesConfidence IntervalsCost-Benefit AnalysisCost of IllnessDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeptanoic AcidsHospitalizationAtorvastatinHeptanoic AcidsHypolipidemic AgentsPyrrolesSimvastatin

Identifiers

PMID19898698
PMCPMC2776564
OpenAlexW2026885891

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.