The cost-effectiveness of C-reactive protein testing and rosuvastatin treatment for patients with normal cholesterol levels.

OBJECTIVES We sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of applying the JUPITER (Justification for the Use of statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin) trial results into clinical practice. BACKGROUND The JUPITER trial found that rosuvastatin reduces vascular events in apparently healthy subjects with elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) but normal low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. The implications of expanding treatment recommendations based on these results have not been evaluated. METHODS We constructed a cost-effectiveness model of men ≥ 50 years and women ≥ 60 years with LDL cholesterol levels of <130 mg/dl and no known cardiovascular disease. We compared: 1) hs-CRP testing followed by rosuvastatin treatment for patients with hs-CRP levels ≥ 2.0 mg/l; and 2) usual care (i.e., no testing and no treatment). Estimates of treatment effectiveness were based on the JUPITER trial and were varied in sensitivity analyses. RESULTS Among patients with LDL <130 mg/dl and hs-CRP levels ≥ 2.0 mg/l, rosuvastatin had an incremental cost-effectiveness of $25,198 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained compared to usual care. If the effectiveness of rosuvastatin were 50% of that observed in JUPITER, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio would increase to $50,871 per QALY. Implementing this strategy only in patients with a Framingham risk score ≥ 10% yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness of $14,205 per QALY. Among such intermediate-risk patients, a JUPITER-based strategy becomes cost-saving at a rosuvastatin price of < $0.86 per day. CONCLUSIONS Rosuvastatin treatment for JUPITER-eligible patients appears to be cost-effective, particularly among those with a Framingham risk score ≥ 10%.