9 research outputs found

    Clinical- and cost-effectiveness of LDL particle-guided statin therapy: A simulation study

    Get PDF
    AbstractWe used the Archimedes Model, a mathematical simulation model (Model) to estimate the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of using LDL particle concentration (LDL-P) as an adjunct or alternative to LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) to guide statin therapy. LDL-P by NMR has been shown to be a better measure of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk than LDL-C, and may therefore be a better gauge of the need for and response to statin treatment. Using the Model, we conducted a virtual clinical trial comparing the use of LDL-C alone, LDL-P alone, and LDL-C and LDL-P together to guide treatment in the general adult population, and in high-risk, dyslipidemic subpopulations. In the general population, the 5-year major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) relative risk reduction (RRR) of LDL-P alone compared to the control arm (LDL-C alone) was 5.0% (95% CI, 4.7–5.3; p p p p In the general population, the costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) associated with the use of LDL-P alone were 76,052at5yearsand76,052 at 5 years and 8913 at 20 years and 142,825at5yearsand142,825 at 5 years and 25,505 at 20 years with the use of both markers. In high-risk subpopulations, the use of LDL-P alone was cost-saving at 5 years; whereas the cost per QALY for the use of both markers was 14,250at5yearsand14,250 at 5 years and 859 at 20 years for high-risk dyslipidemics, 19,192at5yearsand19,192 at 5 years and 649 at 20 years for diabetics, and 9030at5yearsand9030 at 5 years and 7268 at 20 years for patients with prior CHD. In conclusion, the model estimates that using LDL-P to guide statin therapy may reduce the risk of CVD events to a greater extent than does the use of LDL-C alone and maybe cost-effective or cost-saving for high-risk patients

    Introduction

    No full text

    Das lymphatische Zellsystem: Struktur, allgemeine Physiologie und allgemeine Pathophysiologie

    No full text
    corecore