Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Cardiol. 2016 Jan 15;203:422-31. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.10.171. Epub 2015 Oct 21.

Comparing the cost-effectiveness of four novel risk markers for screening asymptomatic individuals to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the US population.

Author information

1
Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
2
Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA.
3
Department of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
4
Institute for Health & Aging and Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
5
Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: m.hunink@erasmusmc.nl.
6
Department of Medicine, The University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

High sensitivity CRP (hsCRP), coronary artery calcification on CT (CT calcium), carotid artery intima media thickness on ultrasound (cIMT) and ankle-brachial index (ABI) improve prediction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, but the benefit of screening with these novel risk markers in the U.S. population is unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS:

A microsimulation model evaluating lifelong cost-effectiveness for individuals aged 40-85 at intermediate risk of CVD, using 2003-2004 NHANES-III (N=3736), Framingham Heart Study, U.S. Vital Statistics, meta-analyses of independent predictive effects of the four novel risk markers and treatment effects was constructed. Using both an intention-to-treat (assumes adherence <100% and incorporates disutility from taking daily medications) and an as-treated (100% adherence and no disutility) analysis, quality adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs (2014 US $), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER in $/QALY gained) of screening with hsCRP, CT coronary calcium, cIMT and ABI were established compared with current practice, full adherence to current guidelines, and ubiquitous statin therapy. In the intention-to-treat analysis in men, screening with CT calcium was cost effective ($32,900/QALY) compared with current practice. In women, screening with hsCRP was cost effective ($32,467/QALY). In the as-treated analysis, statin therapy was both more effective and less costly than all other strategies for both men and women.

CONCLUSIONS:

When a substantial disutility from taking daily medication is assumed, screening men with CT coronary calcium is likely to be cost-effective whereas screening with hsCRP has value in women. The individual perceived disutility for taking daily medication should play a key role in the decision.

KEYWORDS:

Comparative effectiveness; Cost-effectiveness; Long-term prognosis; Novel biomarkers; Primary prevention

PMID:
26547049
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.10.171
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center