ArticleBMJ open2015
Ranolazine for the treatment of chronic stable angina: a cost-effectiveness analysis from the UK perspective.
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ranolazine for stable angina pectoris.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Ranolazine: An Established Anti-anginal Drug with Emerging Antidiabetic Potential Supported by Preclinical and Clinical Evidence.Cardiovascular & hematological disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- A Systematic Review on the Economic Evaluations Evidence of Enhanced External Counter-Pulsation (EECP) for Managing Chronic Stable Angina.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2022Review
- Ranolazine: A true pluripotent cardiovascular drug or jack of all trades, master of none?Sultan Qaboos University medical journal · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo estimate the cost-effectiveness of ranolazine when added to standard-of-care (SoC) antianginals compared with SoC alone in patients with stable coronary disease experiencing ≥3 attacks/week.
settingAn economic model utilising a UK health system perspective, a 1-month cycle-length and a 1-year time horizon.
participantsPatients with stable coronary disease experiencing ≥3 attacks/week starting in 1 of 4 angina frequency health states based on Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency (SAQAF) scores (100=no; 61-99=monthly; 31-60=weekly; 0-30=daily angina).
interventionRanolazine added to SoC or SoC alone. Patients were allowed to transition between SAQAF states (first cycle only) or death (any cycle) based on probabilities derived from the randomised, controlled Efficacy of Ranolazine in Chronic Angina trial and other studies. Patients not responding to ranolazine in month 1 (not improving ≥1 SAQAF health state) discontinued ranolazine and were assumed to behave like SoC patients. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES MEASURES: Costs (£2014) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for patients receiving and not receiving ranolazine.
resultsRanolazine patients lived a mean of 0.701 QALYs at a cost of £5208. Those not receiving ranolazine lived 0.662 QALYs at a cost of £5318. The addition of ranolazine to SoC was therefore a dominant economic strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was sensitive to ranolazine cost; exceeding £20,000/QALY when ranolazine's cost was >£203/month. Ranolazine remained a dominant strategy when indirect costs were included and mortality rates were assumed to increase with worsening severity of SAQAF health states. Monte Carlo simulation found ranolazine to be a dominant strategy in ∼71% of 10,000 iterations.
conclusionsAlthough UK-specific data on ranolazine's efficacy and safety are lacking, our analysis suggest ranolazine added to SoC in patients with weekly or daily angina is likely cost-effective from a UK health system perspective.
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.