title: Cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin 20 mg for the prevention of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality: a Swedish economic evaluation of the JUPITER trial.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  This study estimated the long-term health outcomes, healthcare costs, and cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin 20 mg therapy in primary prevention of major cardiovascular disease (CVD) in a Swedish population.
  
  
  METHODS
  Based on data from the JUPITER trial, long-term CVD outcomes with rosuvastatin vs no active treatment were estimated for patients with an elevated baseline CVD risk (Framingham CVD score >20%, sub-population of JUPITER population) and for a population similar to the total JUPITER population. Using a decision-analytic model, trial CVD event rates were combined with epidemiological and cost data specific for Sweden. First and subsequent CVD events and death were estimated over a lifetime perspective. The observed relative risk reduction was extrapolated beyond the trial duration. Incremental effectiveness was measured as life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Treating 100,000 patients with rosuvastatin 20 mg was estimated to avoid 14,692 CVD events over the lifetime (8021 non-fatal MIs, 3228 non-fatal strokes, and 4924 CVD deaths) compared to placebo. This translated into an estimated gain of 42,122 QALYs and 36,865 total life years (LYG). Rosuvastatin was both more effective and less costly over a lifetime perspective, and rosuvastatin is subsequently a dominant alternative compared to no treatment in the assessed population. Using the overall JUPITER population, rosuvastatin was dominant for the lifetime horizon. In the sensitivity analysis, rosuvastatin was the dominant treatment strategy over a 20-year time horizon, and cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per QALY) of SEK 1783 over a 10-year time horizon.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Some model inputs were derived from literature or other data sources, but uncertainty was controlled by sensitivity analyses.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Results indicate that rosuvastatin 20 mg treatment is a cost-effective option vs no-treatment in patients with Framingham CVD risk >20% in Sweden and might even be cost saving if taking a long-term perspective.
authors: Texas A&M Health Science Center, College Station, TX, USA.
authors: Robert L
authors: RL
authors: Ohsfeldt
authors: Anders G
authors: AG
authors: Olsson
authors: Marie M
authors: MM
authors: Jensen
authors: Sanjay K
authors: SK
authors: Gandhi
authors: Thomas
authors: T
authors: Paulsson
mesh_terms: D002318:Cardiovascular Diseases / Q000401:mortality* / Q000517:prevention & control*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005464:Fluorobenzenes / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D006801:Humans; D019161:Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D009010:Monte Carlo Method; D009017:Morbidity; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000191:economics*; D011743:Pyrimidines / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000068718:Rosuvastatin Calcium; D013449:Sulfonamides / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics* / Q000627:therapeutic use; D013548:Sweden / Q000453:epidemiology
chemical_list: D005464:Fluorobenzenes; D019161:Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; D011743:Pyrimidines; D013449:Sulfonamides; D000068718:Rosuvastatin Calcium