Economic evaluation of single-pill combination of indapamide and amlodipine in the treatment of arterial hypertension in the Polish setting.

BACKGROUND: Arterial hypertension is a common disorder that affects around 9 million adults in Poland. Single-pill combinations (SPCs) for the treatment of arterial hypertension have significant advantages over the free combinations, resulting in lower risk of cardiovascular events and lower consumption of medical resources. The current ESC/ESH 2013 guidelines for the first time recommend treatment with a combination of thiazide-like diuretic with calcium channel blocker. Currently, no such combination is reimbursed from public funds in Poland. AIM: To assess the economic value of treatment with SPC of indapamide and amlodipine (Tertens-AM®) for hypertensive patients compared with free combination therapy (FC), in the Polish setting. METHODS: As there are currently no published data directly estimating the additional effect of using indapamide + amlo-dipine SPC vs. FC, two extreme approaches are presented: with difference in effectiveness due to improved adherence to the treatment estimated from published studies on other molecules used in hypertension such as SPCs and FCs - the base-case approach (1); and assuming no difference of effectiveness or adherence between SPC and FC of indapamide and amlodipine - the conservative approach (2). Modelling was carried out based on the Markov process in lifetime horizon. In the base-case approach, with the difference in effectiveness between SPC and FC, it was assumed that the differences in compliance translate into the differences in systolic blood pressure. Patients' characteristics were correlated with the risk of events associated with cardiovascular disease, based on the prediction algorithms from the Framingham Heart Study. Costs were considered from a National Health Fund (NHF) perspective and NHF and patient's perspective, and therefore direct medical costs were only included. RESULTS: The treatment with SPC of indapamide and amlodipine in place of FC resulted in 7.6 additional days of life in full health and longer overall patient survival by 2.9 days. The replacement of FC with SPC would result in national savings from both NHF perspective and NHF and patient's perspective, irrespective of the assumption of the difference in adherence between SPC and FC. The savings would amount to 1.602-3.954 million PLN and 16.498-19.186 million PLN from NHF perspective and NHF and patient's perspective, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment with SPC of indapamide and amlodipine for hypertensive patients was found to be dominant over FC or at least less expensive than treatment with FC when the difference in effectiveness was neglected. The replacement of FC with SPC would result in savings from both NHF perspective and NHF and patient's perspective.

Cost-effectiveness of lowering blood pressure with a fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide in type 2 diabetes mellitus: an ADVANCE trial-based analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of routine administration, irrespective of blood pressure (BP), of a fixed-dose combination of perindopril and indapamide to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cost-effectiveness analysis within the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial, an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial of 11,140 participants with type 2 diabetes randomly allocated to receive perindopril plus indapamide (4 mg-1.25 mg/day) or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Health-related quality-of-life measured by the EuroQol-5D, resource utilisation, and cost-effectiveness (cost per death averted at 4.3 years' average follow-up, and estimated cost per life-year gained, by extrapolation). RESULTS: The mean health-related quality-of-life score of survivors was 0.80 (on a 0-1 scale [death to full health]), with no difference between treatment groups. Active treatment reduced hospital admissions for coronary heart disease and coronary revascularisation by 5%. For the Australian participants, perindopril-indapamide cost A$1368 per patient during the trial period, but reduced total hospitalisation costs by A$410 and other medication costs (mainly other BP-lowering drugs) by A$332. The absolute reduction in all-cause mortality for the active treatment group was 1.1%, giving a cost per life saved of A$49,200. Lifetime extrapolation gave an estimated cost per life-year saved of A$10,040 (discounted at 5% per year). CONCLUSION: The combination of perindopril and indapamide in patients with type 2 diabetes appears to be cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: United States National Library of Medicine NCT00145925.

[Arterial hypertension in menopausal women: Clinical, functional, and pharmaco-economical aspects]. / Kliniko-funktsional'nye i farmakoékonomicheskie aspekty arterial'noi gipertenzii u zhenshchin v klimaktericheskom periode.

The study was undertaken to define the specific features of daily variations of blood pressure (BP) and autonomic cardiac regulation (ACR), as well as the functional status of the myocardium and vascular endothelium in females with menopausal arterial hypertension (MPAH) and to assess the pharmacotherapeutic and economical aspects of the combined use of arifon retard and clinonorm. The study enrolled 30 reproductive females with mild and moderate arterial hypertension (AH) and 65 females with MPAH who were randomly divided into 2 groups according to the therapeutic model. MPAH was characterized by more unfavorable hemodynamic changes that AH in the presence of preserved fertile function: greater load on target organs, elevated BP, its inadequate nocturnal lowering, greater BP variations, the magnitude and rate of its morning elevation. In AH, the vasomotor function of the endothelium varies with the clinical form of the disease and with the functional status of the female reproductive system. By and large, in the group of patients with MPAH, the latter was characterized by a more significant decrease in endothelium-dependent vasodilation (EDVD). Arifon retard monotherapy has an adequate antihypertensive effect in female patients with MPAH, by ensuring 24-hour control of BP and affecting its chronostructure. A combination of arifon retard and climonorm has no cumulative effect on the level of BP and on the parameters of pressure-induced load; however, this is a pathogenetically grounded combination that potentiates the positive effects of a diuretic in significantly improving EDVD and ACR. The use of arifon retard in combination with climonorm in MPAH is the most cost-effective for public health care facilities and effective for patients. The course of MPAH is of certain peculiarity, which should be taken into account in choosing a therapeutic model for this category of patients.

[CEA comprehensive evaluation for Western and traditional Chinese hypotensive drugs].

OBJECTIVE: To make a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) comprehensive evaluation for 4 hypotensive drugs, by observing the effects of drugs on blood pressure lowering, symptom improving, and adverse effect and quality of life (QOL) influencing. METHODS: Two hundred and ninety-two patients with mild to moderate hypertension were divided into 4 groups at random and treated with compound Lingjiao Jiangya Pill, benazepril, amlodipine and indapamide respectively with a therapeutic course of 6 weeks. QOL was measured with FS-36 questionnaire and efficacy policy model was applied for comprehensive evaluation of CEA. RESULTS: Through CEA a comprehensive evaluation was made in order as follows: indapamide 3.65 which was the best, and then Lingjiao Jiangya Pill 3.55, amlodipine 2.90 and benazepril 2.35. CONCLUSION: The 4 drugs can not only lower blood pressure but also improve clinical symptoms with less adverse effect. It is of great practical significance to evaluate hypotensive drugs by combining QOL appraisal. The position of Lingjiao Jiangya Pill in CEA order suggests that more attention should be paid to herbal hypotensive drugs.

Perindopril + indapamide: new preparation. Simple trick.

(1) The combination of perindopril 4 mg + indapamide 1.25 mg is approved for second-line treatment of hypertension after failure of perindopril alone. (2) The other combination, of a low dose of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor (2 mg of perindopril) and a diuretic (0.625 mg of indapamide), is being promoted as first-line treatment of hypertension. (3) The clinical files for both preparations are limited to the strict minimum. (4) A dose-finding study showed that the perindopril 4 mg + indapamide 1.25 mg dose combination offered the best risk-benefit ratio by comparison with combinations containing the same perindopril dose but other indapamide doses. (5) A double-blind trial suggests that the antihypertensive activity of the perindopril 4 mg + indapamide 1.25 mg combination is equivalent to that of the captopril 50 mg + hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg and enalapril 20 mg + hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg combinations. The safety profile was the same for the three combinations. (6) The 2-mg perindopril combination has not been compared with perindopril monotherapy at the usual dose of 4 mg, or with indapamide monotherapy at a mean dose of 2.5 mg. (7) The two combinations are costlier than their competitors.