Cost–Utility of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor-Based Treatment Compared With Thiazide Diuretic-Based Treatment for Hypertension in Elderly Australians Considering Diabetes as Comorbidity. Issue 9 (March 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Chowdhury, Enayet K.; Ademi, Zanfina; Moss, John R.; Wing, Lindon M.H.; Reid, Christopher M.
• Other Names: Angeli. Fabio section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 94:Issue 9(2015)
• Publication Date: 2015-03
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000590
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: The objective of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)-based treatment compared with thiazide diuretic-based treatment for hypertension in elderly Australians considering diabetes as an outcome along with cardiovascular outcomes from the Australian government's perspective. We used a cost–utility analysis to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Data on cardiovascular events and new onset of diabetes were used from the Second Australian National Blood Pressure Study, a randomized clinical trial comparing diuretic-based (hydrochlorothiazide) versus ACEI-based (enalapril) treatment in 6083 elderly (age ≥65 years) hypertensive patients over a median 4.1-year period. For this economic analysis, the total study population was stratified into 2 groups. Group A was restricted to participants diabetes free at baseline (n = 5642); group B was restricted to participants with preexisting diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2) at baseline (n = 441). Data on utility scores for different events were used from available published literatures; whereas, treatment and adverse event management costs were calculated from direct health care costs available from Australian government reimbursement data. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 5% per annum. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty around utilities and cost data. After a treatment period of 5 years, for group A, the ICER was Australian dollars (AUD) 27, 698 ([Euro sign] 18, 004; AUD 1–[Euro sign] 0.65) per QALY gained comparing ACEI-based treatment with diuretic-based treatment (sensitive to the utility value for new-onset diabetes). In group B, ACEI-based treatment was a dominant strategy (both more effective and cost-saving). On probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the ICERs per QALY gained were always below AUD 50, 000 for group B; whereas for group A, the probability of being below AUD 50, 000 was 85%. Although the dispensed price of diuretic-based treatment of hypertension in the elderly is lower, upon considering the potential enhanced likelihood of the development of diabetes in addition to the costs of treating cardiovascular disease, ACEI-based treatment may be a more cost-effective strategy in this population. Abstract : Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text