Cost-effectiveness of statins for primary cardiovascular prevention in chronic kidney disease
Open accessAbstract
Objectives The authors sought to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of statins for primary prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).Background Patients with CKD have an elevated risk of MI and stroke. Although HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors (“statins”) may prevent cardiovascular events in patients with non–dialysis-requiring CKD, adverse drug effects and competing risks could materially influence net effects and clinical decision-making.Methods We developed a decision-analytic model of CKD and cardiovascular disease (CVD) to determine the cost-effectiveness of low-cost generic statins for primary CVD prevention in men and women with hypertension and mild-to-moderate CKD. Outcomes included MI and stroke rates, discounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and lifetime costs (2010 USD), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.Results For 65-year-old men with moderate hypertension and mild-to-moderate CKD, statins reduced the combined rate of MI and stroke, yielded 0.10 QALYs, and increased costs by $1,800 ($18,000 per QALY gained). For patients with lower baseline cardiovascular risks, health and economic benefits were smaller; for 65-year-old women, statins yielded 0.06 QALYs and increased costs by $1,900 ($33,400 per QALY gained). Results were sensitive to rates of rhabdomyolysis and drug costs. Statins are less cost-effective when obtained at average retail prices, particularly in patients at lower CVD risk.Conclusions Although statins reduce absolute CVD risk in patients with CKD, the increased risk of rhabdomyolysis, and competing risks associated with progressive CKD, partly offset these gains. Low-cost generic statins appear cost-effective for primary prevention of CVD in patients with mild-to-moderate CKD and hypertension.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A cost-effectiveness analysis of statins for primary CVD prevention in CKD showed statins reduced absolute CVD risk but increased rhabdomyolysis risk and competing risks associated with progressive CKD partly offset these gains.
“A cost-effectiveness analysis of statins for primary CVD prevention in CKD 398 showed that statins reduced absolute CVD risk in patients with CKD but that the increased risk for rhabdomyolysis, and competing risks associated with progressive CKD, partly offset these gains.”
From 2016 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias (2016) · cites this paper as [398]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 74
- Authors
- Erickson, K. F., Japa, S., Owens, D. K., Chertow, G. M., Garber, A. M., & Goldhaber-Fiebert, J. D.
- Affiliations
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
- Harvard University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Erickson, Kevin F.
- Venue
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-03
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1250-1258
- ISSN
- 0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3688058
- OpenAlex
- W2040545278
- Cited by
- 74
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 1.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (F32 HS019178, DK085446, AG037593)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
- Keywords
- statins, chronic kidney disease, primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, cost-effectiveness, myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension, rhabdomyolysis, quality-adjusted life years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, generic statins, drug costs
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Decision Support Techniques, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Kidney Failure, Chronic, Male, Markov Chains, Myocardial Infarction, Primary Prevention, Rhabdomyolysis, Risk, Sex Factors, United States, Drug Costs, Pravastatin, Disease Progression, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors, Stroke
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review