Cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin compared with other statins from a managed care perspective.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to identify the most cost-effective statin or combination of statins, from the perspective of a managed care payer.


METHODS
A decision-analytic model compared the cost-effectiveness of titration to goal with atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin in patients with elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Effectiveness measures included the percentage change from baseline LDL-C and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and the percentage of patients achieving National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Second Adult Treatment Panel (ATP II) LDL-C goals. Direct medical costs were calculated based on drug, physician, and laboratory resource use, multiplied by wholesale acquisition costs for drugs and the 2005 Medicare reimbursement rates for services. A Monte Carlo simulation tested the sensitivity of results to model efficacy inputs.


RESULTS
In the base-case analysis, rosuvastatin dominated atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin. Generic lovastatin dominated fluvastatin. The incremental (absolute) reduction in LDL-C, increase in HDL-C, and increase in patients to goal with rosuvastatin compared with lovastatin were 16%, 3%, and 27%, respectively. Incremental costs per additional 1% reduction in LDL-C, 1% increase in HDL-C, and patient to goal with rosuvastatin versus lovastatin were $8, $41, and $436, respectively. A wide variety of assumptions were assessed and Monte Carlo sensitivity analyses were conducted. Findings were most sensitive to the cost of lovastatin.


CONCLUSIONS
Rosuvastatin dominates atorvastatin, pravastatin, and simvastatin because it is more effective and less costly, and it may be considered cost-effective compared with generic lovastatin. The most cost-effective two-statin formulary contained lovastatin and rosuvastatin.
Benner
Joshua S
JS
ValueMedics Research, LLC, Arlington, VA, and University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD, USA. josh.benner@valuemedics.com
Smith
Timothy W
TW
Klingman
David
D
Tierce
Jonothan C
JC
Mullins
C Daniel
CD
Pethick
Ned
N
O'Donnell
John C
JC
D000328:Adult; D008078:Cholesterol, LDL / Q000187:drug effects*; D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D005464:Fluorobenzenes / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D005569:Formularies as Topic; D006801:Humans; D019161:Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors / Q000145:classification / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D006937:Hypercholesterolemia / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000191:economics; D008329:Managed Care Programs / Q000191:economics*; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D011743:Pyrimidines / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000068718:Rosuvastatin Calcium; D013449:Sulfonamides / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014481:United States
D008078:Cholesterol, LDL; D005464:Fluorobenzenes; D019161:Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; D011743:Pyrimidines; D013449:Sulfonamides; D000068718:Rosuvastatin Calcium