A Novel Approach for Estimating Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacological Treatment in Drug Naïve Adults with Hypertension.

J. Flack
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpw090
2016-10-01
American Journal of Hypertension
Abstract:In this edition the journal, an article by Vasudeva al. 1 report on the cost-effectiveness of extending pharmacological treatment to untreated non-Hispanic Black and White adult men and women aged 35–74 years with hypertension according to the recommended treatment thresholds espoused in the recently published JNC 8 report. 2 The general approach they took to arrive at these estimates was to execute computer simulations to produce their cardiovascular disease (CVD) policy model based on multiple inputs from epidemiological studies, randomized clinical trials, and hospital discharge surveys. Population projections for the 2014–2024 time frame were obtained from the census bureau. Hypertension treatment was recommended as fol-lows: (i) Blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mm Hg for those with diabetes and/or chronic kidney disease (CKD), (ii) diastolic BP <90 mm Hg if <60 years of age, or (iii) BP <150/90 mm Hg if 60 years or older without either diabetes or CKD. The reduction in BP was estimated taking into account the base-line BP level and the number of standard medication doses needed to reach the guideline BP goal according to a trial-based formula. 3 An initial simulation was undertaken to estimate the number of CVD events, CVD deaths and heart failure deaths, costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY); this simulation was repeated in non-Hispanic Black and White adults with stratification by age, sex, and the presence/ absence of CVD, CKD, or diabetes after treatment to their respective JNC 8 BP target. Incremental cost-effective-ness ratios (ICERs) were computed as the change in costs divided by the incremental change in QALYs. The range of ICERs was characterized as: (i) <$50,000 per QALY gained (cost effective), (ii) $50,000 to $149,999 (intermediate value),
What problem does this paper attempt to address?