CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 44Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention

Potential cost-effectiveness of C-reactive protein screening followed by targeted statin therapy for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among patients without overt hyperlipidemia

Blake, Gavin J, Ridker, Paul M, Kuntz, Karen M·2003·The American Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00074-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Evidence suggests that statin therapy reduces the rate of cardiovascular events among patients with low lipid levels but elevated C-reactive protein levels. However, no cost-effectiveness analyses have been performed to assist in determining whether large-scale randomized trials are merited to test this hypothesis.Methods We used a Markov model to estimate the benefits, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness of C-reactive protein screening followed by targeted statin therapy for elevated C-reactive protein levels, compared with dietary counseling alone, for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events among patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels <149 mg/dL. All costs were in 2000 U.S. dollars.Results The potential incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for screening followed by statin therapy compared with no screening and no statin therapy was $48,100 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for 58-year-old men and $94,400 per QALY for 58-year-old women. Screening was most cost-effective for 65-year-old men ($42,600 per QALY) and least cost-effective for 35-year-old women ($207,300 per QALY). Our results were most sensitive to the baseline risk of coronary heart disease, the cost of statin therapy, and the efficacy of statin therapy for preventing myocardial infarction in patients with high C-reactive protein levels. If a 58-year-old man who smokes and is hypertensive was considered, screening for C-reactive protein followed by statin therapy would be cost saving if the cost of statin therapy was reduced to $500 per year. If the cost of statin therapy was reduced to $1 per day, the cost-effectiveness of screening would be $4900 per QALY for 58-year-old men and $19,600 per QALY for women of the same age. If the costs associated with elective revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery) were included in the base case analyses, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for screening would be $40,100 per QALY for 58-year-old men and $87,300 per QALY for women.Conclusion A strategy involving C-reactive protein screening to target statin therapy for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among middle-aged patients without overt hyperlipidemia could be relatively cost-effective and, in some cases, cost saving.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00074-3

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Many atherosclerotic CV events occur in individuals with normal LDL-C.

    “Many atherosclerotic CV events occur in individuals with normal LDL-C (27)”

    From Triglycerides and residual atherosclerotic risk (2021) · cites this paper as [27]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 42 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Blake, G. J., Ridker, P. M., & Kuntz, K. M.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Kuntz, Karen M
ORCID
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-04
Volume
114
Issue
6
Pages
485-494
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0002-9343(03)00074-3
OpenAlex
W2027757325
Cited by
44
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • The American Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
statin therapy, primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, cost-effectiveness, low LDL cholesterol, cardiovascular risk stratification, myocardial infarction prevention, coronary artery disease, quality-adjusted life years, nutrition counseling, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, middle-aged adults
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, C-Reactive Protein, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Counseling, Diet, Female, Humans, Cholesterol, LDL, Male, Markov Chains, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Primary Prevention, Risk Factors, Sensitivity and Specificity, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

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