Trial reportHerz1998
[Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of pravastatin in the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in patients with average cholesterol levels. An analysis for Germany based on the CARE study].
Trial report in Herz, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Cardiovascular Outcomes-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Lipid-Lowering Therapies.PharmacoEconomics · 2017Pooled it
- Self-measurement of blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes: a health economic assessment.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2007Article
- Effectiveness calculation in economic analysis: the case of statins for cardiovascular disease prevention.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2006Article
- Cost effectiveness of statins in coronary heart disease.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2005Review
- [Guidelines of lipid therapy translation into clinical practice].Der Internist · 2005Review
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) after myocardial infarction: results from Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto (GISSI)-Prevenzione Trial.PharmacoEconomics · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Those people who are to decide about health care systems are increasingly forced to identify unnecessary costs and achieve savings in health care. Especially for diseases with high prevalence like illnesses of the heart and the circulatory system preventive measures are very important. This economic analysis tries to clarify whether the secondary-preventive application of the HMG-CoA reductase-inhibitor pravastatin is, apart from the clinical benefit, economically justified in patients suffering from coronary heart disease with average cholesterol levels. In the case of this study, the underlying type of economic evaluation was an incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. The outcome was defined as costs per life-year saved. This retrospective study is based on the results of the CARE (Cholesterol And Recurrent Events) study which has been published elsewhere [21]. When calculating costs we took into account the perspective of 3rd party payers (public health insurance) in Germany. The calculation of cost-effectiveness was carried out for the whole study population in CARE as well as for all patients aged 60 or more years in the CARE study. This was done because the different groups vary by the numbers of avoided myocardial infarctions, strokes and loss of life years. Netcosts for pravastatin therapy, i.e. drug costs for pravastatin minus costs for avoided events, were about 9.54 Mio DM (referring to 1,000 patients treated for a period of 5 years). Net-costs for patients aged 60 or more years were 8.18 Mio DM. The effectiveness was defined as the number of life years saved and amounted to 216 years of life saved (YOLS) in the overall study group. For patients aged 60 or more years we found that 358 years were saved. The costs per life years saved (i.e. the net-costs of pravastatin therapy divided through the number of life years saved) turned out to be 44,000 DM per person in the study group. For patients over 60 the costs were 23,000 DM. Lipid-lowering with pravastatin in the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in Germany is cost-effective. In those patients aged 60 or more yeas the use of pravastatin is even more cost-effective than in all patients included in the CARE study.
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.