Utilidad de un policomprimido cardiovascular en el tratamiento de pacientes en prevención secundaria en España: un estudio de coste-efectividad / Usefulness of a cardiovascular polypill in the treatment of secondary prevention patients in Spain: A Cost-effectiveness study

Introducción y objetivos: Estimar los beneficios en salud y el coste-efectividad de una intervención con un policomprimido (ácido acetilsalicílico 100 mg, atorvastatina 20 mg y ramipril 10 mg) para la prevención secundaria de eventos cardiovasculares desde la perspectiva del Sistema Nacional de Salud español en comparación con la monoterapia múltiple. Métodos: Se utilizó una versión adaptada de un modelo de Markov publicado recientemente y desarrollado y validado en Microsoft Excel para evaluar el coste-efectividad del policomprimido frente a sus monocomponentes combinados en un horizonte temporal de 10 años. La población incluida en el modelo tenía antecedentes de infarto de miocardio y una media de edad de 64,7 años, y la mayoría eran varones. Los parámetros de entrada se obtuvieron de una revisión sistemática de la literatura que informara sobre eficacia, adherencia, utilidades y costes. Los resultados del modelo se expresan en eventos evitados, costes incrementales, años de vida incrementales, años de vida ajustados por calidad incrementales y la razón de coste-efectividad incremental. Resultados: En 10 años, la utilización de un policomprimido cardiovascular en lugar de sus monocomponentes evitaría 46 eventos cardiovasculares no fatales y 11 fatales por cada 1.000 pacientes tratados. Además, el policomprimido es una estrategia más efectiva y más barata. En el análisis probabilístico del caso base, se observa un 90,9% de probabilidad de que el policomprimido sea una estrategia coste-efectiva para una disposición a pagar 30.000 euros por año de vida ajustado por calidad comparada con la monoterapia múltiple. Conclusiones: Se demuestra que el policomprimido es una estrategia coste-efectiva para el Sistema Nacional de Salud español con potencial beneficio clínico (AU)

Introduction and objectives: To estimate the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of a polypill intervention (aspirin 100 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, ramipril 10 mg) compared with multiple monotherapy for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in adults with a history of myocardial infarction from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. Methods: An adapted version of a recently published Markov model developed and validated in Microsoft Excel was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of the polypill with that of its combined monocomponents over a 10-year time horizon. The population included in the model had a mean age of 64.7 years; most were male and had a history of myocardial infarction. The input parameters were obtained from a systematic literature review examining efficacy, adherence, utilities, and costs. The results of the model are expressed in events avoided, incremental costs, incremental life years, incremental quality-adjusted life years, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results: Over a 10-year period, use of the cardiovascular polypill instead of its monocomponents simultaneously would avoid 46 nonfatal and 11 fatal cardiovascular events per 1000 patients treated. The polypill would also be a more effective and cheaper strategy. Probabilistic analysis of the base case found a 90.9% probability that the polypill would be a cost-effective strategy compared with multiple monotherapy at a willingness-to-pay of 30 000 euros per quality-adjusted life year. Conclusions: The polypill would be a cost-effective strategy for the Spanish National Health System with potential clinical benefits (AU)

Usefulness of a Cardiovascular Polypill in the Treatment of Secondary Prevention Patients in Spain: A Cost-effectiveness Study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To estimate the health benefits and cost-effectiveness of a polypill intervention (aspirin 100 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, ramipril 10 mg) compared with multiple monotherapy for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in adults with a history of myocardial infarction from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System. METHODS: An adapted version of a recently published Markov model developed and validated in Microsoft Excel was used to compare the cost-effectiveness of the polypill with that of its combined monocomponents over a 10-year time horizon. The population included in the model had a mean age of 64.7 years; most were male and had a history of myocardial infarction. The input parameters were obtained from a systematic literature review examining efficacy, adherence, utilities, and costs. The results of the model are expressed in events avoided, incremental costs, incremental life years, incremental quality-adjusted life years, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: Over a 10-year period, use of the cardiovascular polypill instead of its monocomponents simultaneously would avoid 46 nonfatal and 11 fatal cardiovascular events per 1000 patients treated. The polypill would also be a more effective and cheaper strategy. Probabilistic analysis of the base case found a 90.9% probability that the polypill would be a cost-effective strategy compared with multiple monotherapy at a willingness-to-pay of 30 000 euros per quality-adjusted life year. CONCLUSIONS: The polypill would be a cost-effective strategy for the Spanish National Health System with potential clinical benefits.