Cost-effectiveness of primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with atorvastatin in type 2 diabetes: results from the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS).

LSE Health and Social Care, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, UK.
Diabetologia (Impact Factor: 6.49). 05/2007; 50(4):733-40. DOI:10.1007/s00125-006-0561-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We estimated the cost-effectiveness of atorvastatin treatment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes using data from the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS).
A total of 2,838 patients, who were aged 40 to 75 years and had type 2 diabetes without a documented history of cardiovascular disease and without elevated LDL-cholesterol, were recruited from 32 centres in the UK and Ireland and randomly allocated to atorvastatin 10 mg daily (n = 1,428) or placebo (n = 1,410). These subjects were followed-up for a median period of 3.9 years. Direct treatment costs and effectiveness were analysed to provide estimates of cost per endpoint-free year over the trial period for alternative definitions of endpoint, and of cost per life-year gained and cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over a patient's lifetime.
Over the trial period, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was estimated to be 7,608 pounds per year free of any CARDS primary endpoint; the ICER was calculated to be 4,896 pounds per year free of any cardiovascular endpoint and 4,120 pounds per year free of any study endpoint. Over lifetime, the incremental cost per life-year gained was 5,107 pounds and the cost per QALY was 6,471 pounds (costs and benefits both discounted at 3.5%).
Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with atorvastatin is a cost-effective intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes, with the ICER for this intervention falling within the current acceptance threshold ( 20,000 pounds per QALY) specified by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).

0 0
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: It has been suggested that statins substantially reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events. We sought to test this hypothesis by performing a meta-analysis of both published and unpublished results from randomised trials of statins. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL up to March 2012 for randomised controlled trials comparing statin with no statin, or comparing high dose versus standard dose statin, with 100 or more randomised participants and at least 6 months' follow-up. Investigators were contacted for unpublished information about venous thromboembolic events during follow-up. Twenty-two trials of statin versus control (105,759 participants) and seven trials of an intensive versus a standard dose statin regimen (40,594 participants) were included. In trials of statin versus control, allocation to statin therapy did not significantly reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events (465 [0.9%] statin versus 521 [1.0%] control, odds ratio [OR] = 0.89, 95% CI 0.78-1.01, p = 0.08) with no evidence of heterogeneity between effects on deep vein thrombosis (266 versus 311, OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.72-1.01) and effects on pulmonary embolism (205 versus 222, OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76-1.12). Exclusion of the trial result that provided the motivation for our meta-analysis (JUPITER) had little impact on the findings for venous thromboembolic events (431 [0.9%] versus 461 [1.0%], OR = 0.93 [95% CI 0.82-1.07], p = 0.32 among the other 21 trials). There was no evidence that higher dose statin therapy reduced the risk of venous thromboembolic events compared with standard dose statin therapy (198 [1.0%] versus 202 [1.0%], OR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.80-1.20, p = 0.87). Risk of bias overall was small but a certain degree of effect underestimation due to random error cannot be ruled out. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary. The findings from this meta-analysis do not support the previous suggestion of a large protective effect of statins (or higher dose statins) on venous thromboembolic events. However, a more moderate reduction in risk up to about one-fifth cannot be ruled out.
    PLoS Medicine 09/2012; 9(9):e1001310. · 15.25 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Statins (hydroxymethylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors) are effective in reducing the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with hyperlipidemia, hypertension, or type II diabetes. Next to their cholesterol-lowering activity, statins have immunomodulatory properties. Based on these properties, we hypothesized that statin use may eventually lead to dysregulation of immune responses, possibly resulting in autoimmunity. We have recently shown in an observational study that statin use was associated with an increased risk of developing rheumatoid arthritis. Our objective was to investigate whether a causal relationship could be established for this finding. The mouse collagen type II (CII)-induced arthritis (CIA) model was used, with immunization, challenge, and euthanasia at days 0, 21, and 42, respectively. Statins were given orally before (day -28 until day 21) or after (day 21 until day 42) CIA induction. Atorvastatin (0.2 mg/day) or pravastatin (0.8 mg/day) was administered. Arthritis was recorded three times a week. Serum anti-CII autoantibodies and cytokines in supernatants from Concanavalin-A-stimulated lymph node cells and CII-stimulated spleen cells were measured. Statin administration accelerated arthritis onset and resulted in 100% arthritic animals, whereas only seven out of 12 nonstatin control animals developed arthritis. Atorvastatin administration after CIA induction resulted in earlier onset than atorvastatin administration before induction, or than pravastatin administration before or after induction. The arthritic score of animals given pravastatin before CIA induction was similar to that of the nonstatin controls, whereas the other groups that received statins showed higher arthritic scores. Atorvastatin administration, especially before CIA induction, increased anti-CII autoantibody production. IL-2 and IL-17 production by lymph node and spleen cells was higher in CIA animals than in PBS controls, but was not affected by statin administration. While IFNγ production was not affected by CIA induction, atorvastatin administration before CIA induction increased the production of this cytokine. These data support previous results from our observational studies, indicating a role for statins in the induction of autoimmunity.
    Arthritis research & therapy 04/2012; 14(2):R90. · 4.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Diabetes & metabolism journal 02/2014; 38(1):32-4.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Dec 19, 2013