Comparative clinical- and cost-effectiveness of candesartan and losartan in the management of hypertension and heart failure: a systematic review, meta- and cost-utility analysis.

نویسندگان

  • A M Grosso
  • P N Bodalia
  • R J Macallister
  • A D Hingorani
  • J C Moon
  • M A Scott
چکیده

The UK National Health Service (NHS) currently spends in excess of £250 million per annum on angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure; with candesartan currently dominating the market. With the recent introduction of generic losartan, we set out to directly compare the branded market leader to its now cheaper alternative. The primary objectives were to compare the blood pressure (BP) lowering efficacy and cardiovascular outcomes of candesartan and losartan in the treatment of essential hypertension and chronic heart failure, respectively. The secondary objective was to model their comparative incremental cost-effectiveness in a UK NHS setting. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library 2009, issue 2), which contains the Hypertension and Heart Group's specialist register, Medline (1950-February 2010), and Embase (1980-February 2010) were included in the search strategy. Selection criteria were randomised studies of candesartan versus losartan in adults (> 18 years). The main outcome measures were as follows: Hypertension: mean change from baseline in trough (24 h postdose) systolic and diastolic BP. Heart failure: composite of cardiovascular death and hospital admission for management of heart failure. Two reviewers applied inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. Eight (three of which met inclusion criteria) and zero trials compared candesartan directly with losartan in the treatment of hypertension and heart failure, respectively. A between-treatment difference of -1.96 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI) -2.40 to -1.51] for trough diastolic BP and -3.00 mmHg (95% CI -3.79 to -2.22) for trough systolic BP in favour of candesartan was observed. Based on this differential, a 10-year Markov model estimates the cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained to exceed £40,000 for using candesartan in place of generic losartan. Candesartan reduces BP to a slightly greater extent when compared with losartan, however, such difference is unlikely to be cost-effective based on current acquisition costs, perceived NHS affordability thresholds and use of combination regimens. We could find no robust evidence supporting the superiority of candesartan over losartan in the treatment of heart failure. We therefore recommend using generic losartan as the ARB of choice which could save the UK NHS approximately £200 million per annum in drug costs.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Effectiveness of Automated Peritoneal Dialysis Compared to Outpatient Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Study

Introduction: The growing trend of renal failure has focused clinical therapy on the cost-effective alternatives such as peritoneal dialysis. Therefore, the present study has investigated the effectiveness of two methods of continuous and automatic peritoneal dialysis in the patients with end stage renal disease. Methods: This study was conducted in the form of a systematic review. Advanced se...

متن کامل

Is Taurolidine-citrate an effective and cost-effective hemodialysis cathe-ter lock solution? A systematic review and cost- effectiveness analysis

Background: Prevention of catheter-related infection is of prime importance,. However, because of the risks caused by the leakage of circulating antibiotics and development of resistance to antibiotics, they are replaced by lock solutions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost- effectiveness of taurolidine-citrate as a hemodialysis catheter lock solution compared to other ...

متن کامل

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Health Interventions: A Critical Review

Background and Aim: Economic evaluation of health interventions by comparing the relevant costs and benefits will result in optimum allocation of resources and increasing the effectiveness of the health system and, through improving equity and increasing accessibility to health services, will lead to increased effectiveness of the health system. The purpose of this study was to critically evalu...

متن کامل

Cost-effectiveness of candesartan versus losartan in the primary preventive treatment of hypertension

BACKGROUND Although angiotensin receptor blockers have different receptor binding properties, no comparative randomized studies with cardiovascular event endpoints have been performed for this class of drugs. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of candesartan (Atacand(®)) versus generic losartan in the primary preventive treatment of hypertension. METHODS A de...

متن کامل

Cost effectiveness of type 2 diabetes screening: A systematic review

Background: Although studies reported diabetes mellitus screening cost effective, the mass screening for type2 diabetes remains controversial. In this study we reviewed the recently evidence about the cost effectiveness of mass screening systematically.   Methods: We reviewed the MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), and Cochrane library databases by MeSH terms to identify relevan...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • International journal of clinical practice

دوره 65 3  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2011