[Economic evaluation of Annao Pills combined with antihypertensive drugs in treatment of primary hypertension: a study based on decision tree model].

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the economics of Annao Pills combined with antihypertensive drugs in the treatment of primary hypertension in the Chinese medical setting. TreeAge pro 2018 was used for cost-effect analysis and sensitivity analysis of the two treatment regimens. The intervention time of the simulation model was 2 weeks. The cost parameters were derived from Yaozhi.com, and the effect parameters were based on Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial(RCT) involving Annao Pills. The experimental group was treated with Annao Pills combined with anti-hypertensive drugs(nifedipine controlled-release tablets + losartan potassium tablets), and the control group was treated with anti-hypertensive drugs(nifedipine controlled-release tablets + losartan potassium tablets). The basic analysis showed that the incremental cost-effect ratio(ICER) of the two groups was 2 678.67 yuan, which was less than 7.26% of the per capita disposable income in 2022. That is, compared with anti-hypertensive drugs alone, Annao Pills combined with antihypertensive drugs cost 2 678.67 yuan more for each additional patient with primary hypertension. The results of sensitivity analysis verified the robustness of the basic analysis results. The probability sensitivity results showed that when the patient's personal willingness to pay the price was higher than 2 650 yuan, the probability of the regimen in the experimental group was higher, which was consistent with the results of the basic analysis. In conclusion, when the price was higher than 2 650 yuan, Annao Pills combined with anti-hypertensive drugs was more economical than anti-hypertensive drugs alone in terms of improving the response rate of the patients with primary hypertension.

Comparing Cardiovascular Outcomes and Costs of Perindopril-, Enalapril- or Losartan-Based Antihypertensive Regimens in South Africa: Real-World Medical Claims Database Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Differences in class or molecule-specific effects between renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors have not been conclusively demonstrated. This study used South African data to assess clinical and cost outcomes of antihypertensive therapy with the three most common RAAS inhibitors: perindopril, losartan and enalapril. METHODS: Using a large, South African private health insurance claims database, we identified patients with a hypertension diagnosis in January 2015 receiving standard doses of perindopril, enalapril or losartan, alone or in combination with other agents. From claims over the subsequent 5 years, we calculated the risk-adjusted rate of the composite primary outcome of myocardial infarction, ischaemic heart disease, heart failure or stroke; rate of all-cause mortality; and costs per life per month (PLPM), with adjustments based on demographic characteristics, healthcare plan and comorbidity. RESULTS: Overall, 32,857 individuals received perindopril, 16,693 losartan and 13,939 enalapril. Perindopril-based regimens were associated with a significantly lower primary outcome rate (205 per 1000 patients over 5 years) versus losartan (221; P < 0.0001) or enalapril (223; P < 0.0001). The risk-adjusted all-cause mortality rate was lower with perindopril than enalapril (100 vs. 139 deaths per 1000 patients over 5 years; P = 0.007), but not losartan (100 vs. 94; P = 0.650). Mean (95% confidence interval) overall risk-adjusted cost PLPM was Rands (ZAR) 1342 (87-8973) for perindopril, ZAR 1466 (104-9365) for losartan (P = 0.0044) and ZAR 1540 (77-10,546) for enalapril (P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: In South African individuals with private health insurance, a perindopril-based antihypertensive regimen provided better clinical and cost outcomes compared with other regimens.

Informe diário de evidências COVID-19: busca realizada em 14 de maio de 2020 / COVID-19 daily evidence report: search conducted on May 14, 2020

Essa é uma produção do Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia (Decit) da Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovação e Insumos Estratégicos em Saúde (SCTIE) do Ministério da Saúde (Decit/SCTIE/MS), que tem como missão promover a ciência e tecnologia e o uso de evidências científicas para a tomada de decisão do SUS, tendo como principal atribuição o incentivo ao desenvolvimento de pesquisas em saúde no Brasil, de modo a direcionar os investimentos realizados em pesquisa pelo Governo Federal às necessidades de saúde pública. Informar sobre as principais evidências científicas descritas na literatura internacional sobre tratamento farmacológico para a COVID-19. Além de resumir cada estudo identificado, o informe apresenta também uma avaliação da qualidade metodológica e a quantidade de artigos publicados, de acordo com a sua classificação metodológica (revisões sistemáticas, ensaios clínicos randomizados, entre outros). Foram encontrados 15 artigos.

Assessment of Losartan 50 mg on Survival of Post-Dialysis Euvolemic Hypertensive Patients: Findings from HELD Trial.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of losartan 50 mg on survival of post-dialysis euvolemic hypertensive patients. METHODOLOGY: A single center, prospective, single-blind randomized trial was conducted to estimate the survival of post-dialysis euvolemic hypertensive patients when treated with lorsartan 50 mg every other day. Post-dialysis euvolemic assessment was done by a body composition monitor. Covariate Adaptive Randomization was used for allocation of participants to the standard or intervention arm, and the follow-up duration was twelve months. The primary end point was achieving targeted blood pressure (BP) of <140/90 mm Hg and maintaining for 4 weeks, whereas secondary end point was all cause of mortality. Pre-, intra-, and post-dialysis session BP measurements were recorded, and survival trends were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Of the total 229 patients, 96 (41.9%) were identified as post-dialysis euvolemic hypertensive. Final samples of 88 (40.1%) patients were randomized into standard (n = 44) and intervention arms (n = 44), and 36 (81.8%) patients in each arm completed a follow-up of 12 months. A total of eight patients passed away during the 12-month follow-up period (6 deaths among standard arm and 2 in intervention arm). However, the probability of survival between both arms was not significant (p = 0.13). Cox regression analysis revealed that chances of survival were higher among the patients in the intervention (OR 3.17) arm than the standard arm (OR 0.31); however, the survival was found not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: There was no statistical significant difference in 1 year survival of post-dialysis euvolemic hypertensive patients when treated with losartan 50 mg.

Impact of the Commercialization of Three Generic Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers on Adverse Events in Quebec, Canada: A Population-Based Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Once the patent of a brand-name drug expires, generic drugs are commercialized, and substitution from brand-name to generics may occur. Generic drug equivalence is evaluated through comparative bioavailability studies. Few studies have assessed outcomes after generic drug commercialization at a population level. We evaluated the impact of 3 generic angiotensin II receptor blockers commercialization on adverse events: hospitalizations or emergency room consultations. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an interrupted time series analysis using the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System. Rates of adverse events for losartan, valsartan, and candesartan users (N=136 177) aged ≥66 years were calculated monthly, 24 months before and 12 months after generics commercialization. Periods before and after generics commercialization were compared by negative binomial segmented regression models. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted. For all users, there was a monthly mean rate of 100 adverse events for 1000 angiotensin II receptor blocker users before and after generic commercialization. Among generic users of losartan, valsartan, and candesartan, there was an increase in rates of adverse events of 8.0% (difference of proportions versus brand-name, 7.5% [95% confidence interval, -0.9% to 15.9%]; P=0.0643), 11.7% (difference of proportions, 17.1% [95% confidence interval, 9.9%-24.3%]; P<0.0001), and 14.0% (difference of proportions, 16.6% [95% confidence interval, 7.9%-25.3%]; P<0.0001), respectively, the month of generic commercialization. The monthly trend of adverse events was affected for generic versus brand-name losartan users only (difference of proportions, 2.0% [0.7%-3.4%]; P=0.0033) ≤1 year after generics commercialization. Similar results were found in sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Among generic users, immediate or delayed differences in adverse events rates were observed right after generic commercialization for 3 antihypertensive drugs. Rates of adverse events remained higher for generic users. Increases were more pronounced for generic candesartan, which is the studied product with the largest difference in comparative bioavailability. Risk and survival analysis studies controlling for several potential confounding factors are required to better characterize generic substitution.

Farmácia Popular Program: pharmaceutical market analysis of antihypertensive acting on the renin-angiotensin system medicines.

This paper aims to analyse changes in the retail pharmaceutical market following policy changes in the Farmácia Popular Program (FP), a medicines subsidy program in Brazil. The retrospective longitudinal analyses focus on therapeutic class of agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system. Data obtained from QuintilesIMS (formerly IMS Health) included private retail pharmacy sales volume (pharmaceutical units) and sales values from 2002 to 2013. Analyses evaluated changes in market share following key FP policy changes. The therapeutic class was selected due to its relevance to hypertension treatment. Market share was analysed by therapeutic sub-classes and by individual company. Losartan as a single product accounted for the highest market share among angiotensin II antagonists. National companies had higher sales volume during the study period, while multinational companies had higher sales value. Changes in pharmaceutical market share coincided with the inclusion of specific products in the list of medicines covered by FP and with increases in or exemption from patient copayment.

Farmácia Popular Program: pharmaceutical market analysis of antihypertensive acting on the renin-angiotensin system medicines / Programa Farmácia Popular: análise do mercado farmacêutico de anti-hipertensivos do sistema renina-angiotensina

Abstract This paper aims to analyse changes in the retail pharmaceutical market following policy changes in the Farmácia Popular Program (FP), a medicines subsidy program in Brazil. The retrospective longitudinal analyses focus on therapeutic class of agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system. Data obtained from QuintilesIMS (formerly IMS Health) included private retail pharmacy sales volume (pharmaceutical units) and sales values from 2002 to 2013. Analyses evaluated changes in market share following key FP policy changes. The therapeutic class was selected due to its relevance to hypertension treatment. Market share was analysed by therapeutic sub-classes and by individual company. Losartan as a single product accounted for the highest market share among angiotensin II antagonists. National companies had higher sales volume during the study period, while multinational companies had higher sales value. Changes in pharmaceutical market share coincided with the inclusion of specific products in the list of medicines covered by FP and with increases in or exemption from patient copayment.

Resumo Este artigo visa analisar as mudanças no mercado de varejo farmacêutico, seguindo as alterações de diretiva no Programa Farmácia Popular (FP), que realiza subvenção de medicamentos no Brasil, em parceria pública privada. Foi realizada análise longitudinal retrospectiva dos medicamentos da classe terapêutica dos agentes que atuam sobre o sistema renina-angiotensina. Os dados obtidos do QuintilesIMS incluíram o varejo farmacêutico em termos do volume e valores de vendas de 2002 a 2013. Análises realizadas consideraram intervenções e reformas ocorridas no FP e seu impacto no mercado farmacêutico da classe terapêutica selecionada, devido a sua relevância para o tratamento da hipertensão. Também se examinou o comportamento do mercado tomando por base as empresas farmacêuticas produtoras. Losartan monodroga representou a maior fatia de mercado entre os antagonistas de angiotensina II. Empresas nacionais obtiveram maior volume de vendas durante o período de estudo, enquanto as empresas multinacionais exibiram maior valor de vendas. Mudanças no mercado farmacêutico coincidiram com a inclusão de produtos específicos na lista de medicamentos abrangidos pelo FP e com aumentos ou isenção de copagamento pelos pacientes.

Cost-effectiveness of the polypill versus risk assessment for prevention of cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVE: There is an international trend towards recommending medication to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD) in individuals at increasingly lower cardiovascular risk. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a population approach with a polypill including a statin (simvastatin 20 mg) and three antihypertensive agents (amlodipine 2.5 mg, losartan 25 mg and hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg) and periodic risk assessment with different risk thresholds. METHODS: We developed a microsimulation model for lifetime predictions of CVD events, diabetes, and death in 259 146 asymptomatic UK Biobank participants aged 40-69 years. We assessed incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for polypill scenarios with the same combination of agents and doses but differing for starting age, and periodic risk assessment with 10-year CVD risk thresholds of 10% and 20%. RESULTS: Restrictive risk assessment, in which statins and antihypertensives were prescribed when risk exceeded 20%, was the optimal strategy gaining 123 QALYs (95% credible interval (CI) -173 to 387) per 10 000 individuals at an extra cost of £1.45 million (95% CI 0.89 to 1.94) as compared with current practice. Although less restrictive risk assessment and polypill scenarios prevented more CVD events and attained larger survival gains, these benefits were offset by the additional costs and disutility of daily medication use. Lowering the risk threshold for prescription of statins to 10% was economically unattractive, costing £40 000 per QALY gained. Starting the polypill from age 60 onwards became the most cost-effective scenario when annual drug prices were reduced below £240. All polypill scenarios would save costs at prices below £50. CONCLUSIONS: Periodic risk assessment using lower risk thresholds is unlikely to be cost-effective. The polypill would become cost-effective if drug prices were reduced.

Economic evaluation of primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in mild hypertension: a scenario analysis for the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, antihypertensive treatment for patients with mild hypertension is recommended if the 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk exceeds 20%. Recent evidence suggests that lifelong CVD risk estimates might be more informative than 10-year ones. In addition, the cost of antihypertensive treatment in the Netherlands has decreased during the last decade. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of lowering systolic blood pressure (SBP) in patients ineligible for treatment in both a 10-year and a lifetime horizon. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness of SBP reduction compared with no reduction in patients with mild hypertension and low CVD risk. Modified SCORE (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) risk estimates were used to predict fatal and nonfatal CVD events. We analyzed scenarios for different age groups, sexes, and SBP reductions. Specifically, SBP reductions due to hydrochlorothiazide (HCT) 25 mg and hypothetical reductions with HCT 12.5 mg-losartan 50 mg combination were assumed. Parameter uncertainty was assessed through a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: In a 10-year horizon, in scenarios of SBP reduction with HCT 25 mg, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates for men varied across different ages in the range of €6032 to €58,217 per life-year gained, whereas for women ICER estimates were in the range of €12,345 to €361,064 per life-year gained. In a lifetime horizon, the cost-effectiveness estimates were favorable for both sexes. In scenarios of hypothetical SBP reductions, more favorable ICER estimates compared with no reduction were found. A large uncertainty around the cost-effectiveness estimates was observed among all scenarios. CONCLUSION: Larger SBP reductions were found to be cost-effective in both a 10-year and lifetime horizon. These findings might call for more aggressive SBP reductions in patients with mild hypertension. However, a high level of uncertainty surrounds these cost-effectiveness estimates because they are based on CVD risk prediction modeling.

Measures to improve angiotensin receptor blocker prescribing efficiency in the UK: findings and implications.

BACKGROUND: Generic losartan provides an opportunity to enhance angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) prescribing efficiency, with all ARBs essentially being similar. Initially, there was limited activity in NHS Bury (UK). This changed in March 2011 with therapeutic switching and other measures encouraging the prescribing of losartan following generics to enhance its utilization versus patented ARBs. AIM: This study aims to assess the impact of multiple measures on losartan utilization, its price and total ARB expenditure. METHODS: An interrupted time series analysis was performed. Utilization was measured as prescription items dispensed, typically 28 days. RESULTS: No immediate change in losartan utilization was observed following generics. This changed after the multiple initiatives with losartan accounting for 65% of all single ARB items dispensed by the study end. ARB expenditure was 59% below prestudy levels by the study end, which was helped by a 92% reduction in expenditure per item for losartan. Annual net savings from the program were estimated at just under GB£290,000, which is over eight-times the cost of implementation. CONCLUSION: Multiple measures can enhance prescribing efficiency. Health authorities cannot rely on a 'spillover' effect from other classes in order to affect changes in physician prescribing habits.

Impact of delisting ARBs, apart from losartan, on ARB utilisation patterns in Denmark: implications for other countries.

INTRODUCTION: Renin-angiotensin inhibitor drugs have been a target for health authority initiatives across Europe with the potential for substantial savings once generic angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) became available without compromising care. Recently, losartan was the first angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) to lose its patent. In Denmark, the authorities removed all other ARBs from the reimbursement list, apart from losartan, as they were all seen as essentially similar for the management of hypertension or congestive heart failure at appropriate doses, but more expensive. Similarly, all other ARB fixed-dose combinations (FDCs), apart from losartan, were removed from the reimbursement list. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the study were to (i) assess the impact of these reimbursement changes on the subsequent utilisation of losartan and other ARBs alone or as FDCs; (ii) assess changes in the prices of losartan and other ARBs post-generic losartan to calculate potential savings; and (iii) compare the impact of the policies in Denmark with other European countries to provide guidance. METHODOLOGY: This was a retrospective segmented regression analysis of an interrupted time-series design comparing utilisation patterns before and after the changes in ARB reimbursement status. Utilisation was measured in defined daily doses (DDDs). Changes in total expenditure and expenditure/DDD were also assessed over time. RESULTS: Losartan utilisation grew from 31 to 33 % of total single ARB utilisation before generic losartan, to 93 % by October 2011. There was a corresponding decrease in the utilisation of all other ARBs. Both changes were significant (p < 0.001). Total expenditure on single ARBs in 2011 was 77 % below 2009 levels despite a 16 % increase in utilisation. Estimated savings were 290.5 million Danish Kroner (DKK). A similar trend was seen for losartan FDCs, which was also significant (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Losartan utilisation grew appreciable following the changes. The change was much greater than seen in countries that had eased prescribing restrictions for losartan but not the other ARBs. Active therapeutic switching programmes plus education and financial incentives also significantly enhanced losartan utilisation following generics in two countries and regions; however, the increase in losartan utilisation was less than that seen in Denmark.

Are prescribing initiatives readily transferable across classes: the case of generic losartan in Scotland?

BACKGROUND: There are on-going initiatives in Scotland to improve the quality and efficiency of prescribing in primary care. Activities to enhance prescribing of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) versus angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) include prescribing guidance, guidelines, benchmarking, prescribing targets and financial incentives. These measures stabilised reimbursed expenditure for renin-angiotensin inhibitor drugs between 2001 and 2007 despite a 159% increase in volumes. Generic losartan was included in the Drug Tariff from July 2010. As there is no appreciable difference between ARBs, and the prices of generic losartan are falling, health boards should be actively encouraging its prescribing. AIM: To primarily assess changes in utilisation patterns of losartan versus other ARBs after July 2010. Second, to assess the utilisation of generic versus originator losartan. METHOD: We used an interrupted time series analysis of ARB utilisation, measured in defined daily doses (DDDs) before and after July 2010. Utilisation data were obtained from the NHS National Services Scotland Corporate Warehouse. RESULTS: There was no significant change in the utilisation pattern of losartan or other ARBs combined before or after the introduction of generic losartan. Losartan accounted for 32% of total ARBs 12 months after listing. Between 98 and 99% of losartan was prescribed generically. In March 2012, the price of losartan was 88% below prepatent prices with potential savings of ?8m per year. CONCLUSION: Specific measures are needed to change prescribing habits especially with complex messages. The cost of deriving savings must be weighed against other quality initiatives and other ARBs losing or shortly losing their patents.

Impact of antihypertensive medication adherence on blood pressure control in hypertension: the COMFORT study.

BACKGROUND: It has not been fully elucidated whether antihypertensive medication adherence affects blood pressure (BP) control in hypertension cases. AIM: To investigate the association of adherence to antihypertensive drug regimens and BP control using data from the Combination Pill of Losartan Potassium and Hydrochlorothiazide for Improvement of Medication Compliance Trial (COMFORT) study. DESIGN: An observational analysis from a randomized controlled trial. METHODS: A total of 203 hypertensive subjects were randomly assigned to a daily regimen of a combination pill (losartan 50 mg/hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg) or two pills, an angiotensin II receptor blocker and a thiazide diuretic. Medication adherence calculated based on pill counts and BPs was evaluated at 1, 3 and 6 months after randomization. RESULTS: The subjects were divided into three groups according to their adherence, i.e. relatively low-adherence (<90%; n = 19), moderate-adherence (90-99%; n = 71) and high-adherence (100%; n = 113) groups. Clinical characteristics of the subjects including BP, sex, randomized treatments and past medical history did not differ significantly among the three groups. Achieved follow-up BPs over the 6-month treatment period, which were adjusted for age, sex, baseline BP and randomized treatment, were significantly higher in the low-adherence group (135/78 mmHg) compared with the high-adherence (130/74 mmHg; P = 0.02/0.02) and the moderate-adherence (128/74 mmHg; P = 0.003/0.02) groups. CONCLUSION: Low adherence to an antihypertensive-drug regimen was associated with poor BP control.

Influence of multiple initiatives in Sweden to enhance ARB prescribing efficiency following generic losartan; findings and implications for other countries.

BACKGROUND: Encouraging the prescribing of ACEIs first line vs. angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) has been a health authority focus with generic ACEIs as ACEIs and ARBs have similar effectiveness and there is limited coughing with ACEIs. This includes Sweden with its multiple initiatives keeping expenditure on renin-angiotensin inhibitor drugs similar between 2001 and 2007 despite appreciably increased volumes. Generic losartan became available and was reimbursed in March 2010 providing further opportunities for the authorities in Sweden to save costs with all ARBs seen as similar in managing hypertension and CHF at appropriate doses. AIMS: The main aim of this study was to assess changes in the utilisation of losartan vs. other single ARBs after generic losartan alongside accompanying demand-side measures. Additional aims were to (i) assess changes in the price of generic losartan and single ARB expenditure over time; (ii) suggest additional programmes, if needed; and (iii) analyse utilisation of ARB FDCs and compare with ACEI FDCs. METHODS: Retrospective observational study using an interrupted time series design. RESULTS: Multiple demand-side measures introduced among the 21 Counties in Sweden significantly enhanced the utilisation of generic losartan, growing from 26% to 27% of total ARBs (DDD basis) before generic losartan to 40% by August 2011. Losartan was principally generics (97% by August 2011). Expenditure/DDD for generic losartan was 10% of the pre-patent loss price in August 2011. This reduced total single ARB expenditure by 26% by the study end despite a 16% increase in utilisation. Greater utilisation of ARB FDCs than seen with ACEI FDCs. This may be due to similarities in prices between single and FDC ARBs. DISCUSSION: Multiple demand-side measures appreciably enhanced ARB prescribing efficiency, mirroring other studies. No significant increase in losartan utilisation following generics was seen in European countries where no specific measures were instigated. Losartan price reduction was in line with expectations. CONCLUSION: Multiple and intensive demand-side measures are needed to change physician prescribing habits. Authorities cannot rely on physicians transferring their activities from one class to another without interventions.

Influence of lifting prescribing restrictions for losartan on subsequent sartan utilization patterns in Austria: implications for other countries.

INTRODUCTION: Prescribing restrictions for angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) limited their utilization in Austria. Recently, generic losartan became available with its prescribing restrictions lifted while still in place for patented ARBs. OBJECTIVES: The main aim of this study is to assess the impact of the lifting of the prescribing restriction on utilization of losartan in ambulatory care versus other single ARBs, expenditure per defined daily dose (DDD) of losartan as well as total ARB expenditure and utilization of ARB combinations. Finally, to suggest potential measures that could be introduced to further enhance ARB-prescribing efficiency. METHODOLOGY: A quasi-experimental study of the utilization of different ARBs alone or in fixed dose combinations using a segmented time series. Utilization measured in DDDs, defined as 'the average maintenance dose of a drug when used in its major indication in adults'. Costs measured as total expenditure for different ARBs as well as their expenditure/DDD. RESULTS: Losartan utilization increased significantly following the withdrawal of prescribing restrictions (p > 0.001). Utilization of single-sourced ARBs also increased , but the growth rate was appreciably reduced once restrictions were lifted for losartan (p > 0.01). As a result, total expenditure of single ARBs increased but at an appreciably lower rate than utilization, helped by total expenditure/DDD for losartan declining by 78% over the study period. There was continuing appreciable utilization of fixed-dose combinations. CONCLUSION: Lifting of prescribing restrictions for losartan significantly enhanced its utilization, increasing ARB-prescribing efficiency, providing direction to other European authorities. Additional reforms are being considered to further switch utilization away from single-sourced ARBs to additionally improve prescribing efficiency as more multiple sourced ARBs become available.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of valsartan versus losartan and the effect of switching.

OBJECTIVES: Losartan will shortly become generic, and this may encourage switching to the generic drug. However, valsartan was shown in a meta-analysis to be statistically superior in lowering blood pressure (BP) to losartan. This paper examines the costs of treatment with these two drugs and the potential consequences of switching established valsartan patients to generic losartan. METHODS: A US payer cost-effectiveness model was developed incorporating the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events related to systolic blood pressure (SBP) control comparing valsartan to continual losartan and switching from valsartan to generic losartan. The model, based upon a meta-analysis by Nixon et al. and Framingham equations, included first CVD event costs calculated from US administrative data sets and utility values from published sources. The modeled outcomes were number of CVD events, costs and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and life-year (LY). RESULTS: Fewer patients had fatal and non-fatal CVD events with valsartan therapy compared with continual losartan and with patients switched from valsartan to generic losartan. The base-case model results indicated that continued treatment with valsartan had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $27,268 and $25,460 per life year gained, and $32,313 and $30,170 per QALY gained, relative to continual losartan and switching treatments, respectively. Sensitivity analyses found that patient discontinuation post-switching was a sensitive parameter. Including efficacy offsets with lowered adherence or discontinuation resulted in more favorable ratios for valsartan compared to switching therapy. LIMITATIONS: The model does not evaluate post-primary CVD events and considers change in SBP from baseline level as the sole predictor of CVD risk. CONCLUSIONS: Valsartan appears to be cost-effective compared to switching to generic losartan and switching to the generic drug does not support a cost offset argument over the longer term. Physicians should continue to consider the needs of individual patient and not cost offsets.

ACEI and ARB combination therapy in patients with macroalbuminuric diabetic nephropathy and low socioeconomic level: a double-blind randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The combination of an ACE inhibitor (ACEI) and an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) has been proposed for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy (DN), but doubts remain about its efficacy and safety. We compared the effects of combination therapy and ACEI monotherapy on proteinuria and on three urinary inflammatory cytokines (MCP-1, TGF-beta and VEGF). DESIGN AND PATIENTS: 56 patients with macroalbuminuric DN received 40 mg/d enalapril for 4 months, followed by add-on 100 mg/day losartan or placebo for another 4 months. The primary and secondary endpoints were reduction of proteinuria and cytokine levels, respectively. RESULTS: Proteinuria did not fall in either group. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed no difference between groups. A high side effect rate was observed (28.5%). Finally, unadjusted logistic regression showed no difference between groups, but after adjustments the risk of worsening proteinuria was higher in the combination therapy group (p = 0.04). The same pattern was observed for urinary MCP- 1. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that 1) in advanced DN with severe proteinuria and poor metabolic control, angiotensin II blockade may be less effective than in other groups of CKD patients. 2) In such patients, combination therapy may not afford superior renoprotection compared to enalapril. 3) Urinary MCP-1 is a promising biomarker for the response to ACEI and/or ARB treatment and for the risk of associated unwanted effects.

Influence of demand-side measures to enhance renin-angiotensin prescribing efficiency in Europe: implications for the future.

UNLABELLED: European countries strive to enhance prescribing efficiency. This includes renin-angiotensin drugs following the availability of generic angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs). AIMS: To compare angiotensin receptor blocker utilization and expenditure patterns in Austria and Croatia following prescribing restrictions, as well as with other European countries introducing different supply- and demand-side measures. Lastly, to appraise the impact of generic losartan in Croatia on utilization of patented angiotensin receptor blockers. METHOD: Observational retrospective study principally between 2001 and 2007, using defined daily doses and €/1000 inhabitants/year. Demand-side measures were based on the four 'E's - education, engineering, economics and enforcement. RESULTS: Greater intensity of follow-up of prescribing restrictions in Croatia enhanced utilization of ACEIs versus Austria. There was high utilization of ACEIs in Scotland following intensive demand-side measures, similar to Austria and Croatia. Demand-side measures in Spain (Catalonia) and Sweden also appeared to moderate angiotensin receptor blockers utilization. The combination of measures helped stabilize expenditure on renin-angiotensin drugs when adjusted for population sizes despite appreciable increases in volumes. The only exception was Portugal, with less intensive measures. CONCLUSION: Multiple and intensive demand-side measures enhanced prescribing efficiency. The more intense follow-up of ARB prescribing restrictions in Croatia had a greater influence on subsequent utilization patterns than Austria. Both findings confirm earlier studies. Reforms also favorably enhanced the prescribing of generic losartan once available.