A cost-effectiveness model of alternative statins to achieve target LDL-cholesterol levels.

An economic model was developed to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of alternative HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins)--atorvastatin, cerivastatin, fluvastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin--to achieve target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in a population of secondary CHD prevention patients. By using a cholesterol target as the endpoint of interest and a dose titration approach, the model assumes that the statins demonstrate a class effect through cholesterol lowering. The model was used to estimate the proportion of patients achieving target LDL-C levels (< 3 mmol/l) under each scenario tested. Total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness relative to no treatment and to the lowest cost option were estimated for each scenario. Total costs were highest for pravastatin and lowest for cerivastatin. Compared with no treatment, the incremental cost per patient treated to target LDL-C varied between 383 Pounds (atorvastatin) and 1213 Pounds (pravastatin). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in comparison with the lowest cost treatment (cerivastatin) were 141 Pounds per additional patient achieving target LDL-C with atorvastatin, and 275 Pounds with simvastatin. Fluvastatin and pravastatin were both less effective and more expensive than the lowest cost therapy. Although cerivastatin was associated with lowest expected costs, therapy with atorvastatin achieved the lowest cost-effectiveness ratios. Hence atorvastatin would allow the largest number of patients to be treated to target LDL-C within a fixed drug budget. Choosing between drug therapies on the basis of price alone may be misleading if the effectiveness of therapies varies.