Parra-Carrillo JZ, Verdejo-Paris J, Lemus-Carmona EA, Saucedo-Sánchez N

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 141-148
PDF size: 89.20 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Systemic arterial hypertension (SAH) is an important cause of financial burden over the worldwide health budget. Currently there are different drugs for the treatment of SAH, such as those of the therapeutic group of the angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB II). This group has demonstrated efficacy and an acceptable safety profile. Due to the existence of several treatment options, it is relevant to make an economic evaluation of the different alternatives in order to know the cost-effectiveness relationship among these treatments. This analysis makes a literature review of the ARB II in terms of efficacy, where the primary efficacy endpoint is absolute number of mmHg reduction, with this information a cost-effectiveness analysis was run. The drugs analyzed are: Irbesartan, valsartan, telmisartan, losartan, irbesartan/hydrochlorothiazide and valsartan/hydrochlorothiazide. The cost-effectiveness relationships were obtained dividing the treatment cost by the efficacy (mmHg reduction). Efficacy and costs must correspond to the same period of time reported at the end of the clinical study. The results show that irbesartan is highly cost-effective compared to the other options because it has the lowest cost-effectiveness ratios for both, systolic and diastolic arterial pressure. SAH is a public health problem which can be treated efficiently with the rational use of effective and cost-effective drugs.

REFERENCES

1. Kearney PM, Whelton M, Reynolds K et al. Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet 2005; 365(9455): 217-223.

2. Rosendorff C, Black HR, Cannon CP et al. Treatment of hypertension in the prevention and management of ischemic heart disease: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council for High Blood Pressure Research and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Epidemiology and Prevention. Circulation 2007; 115(21): 2766.

3. Velázquez –Monroy O et al. Hipertensión arterial en México: Resultados de la Encuesta nacional de Salud (ENSA) 2000. Archivos de Cardiología de México 2002; 72: 71-84.

4. Rosas-Peralta M, Lara-Esqueda A, Pastelín-Hernández G y cols. Reencuesta Nacional de Hipertensión Arterial (RENHATA): Consolidación Mexicana de los Factores de Riesgo Cardiovascular. Cohorte Nacional de Seguimiento. Archivos de Cardiología de México. 2005; 75(1): 96-111.

5. Olaiz-Fernández G, Rivera-Dommarco J, Shamah-Levy T, Rojas R, Villalpando-Hernández S, Hernández-Avila M, Sepúlveda-Amor J. Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición 2006. Cuernavaca, México: Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, 2006.

6. American Diabetes Association. Treatment of hypertension in adults with diabetes. Diabetes Care 2003; 26(suppl 1): S80-S82.

7. National Kidney Foundation Guideline. K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative. Am J Kidney Dis 2002; 39(suppl 2): S1-S246.

8. Parra-Carrillo JZ, Calvo-Vargas CG, Grover-Páez F, García de Alba-García JE, Nápoles-Rodríguez F. ¿Es el costo un factor que modifica la elección de la terapia antihipertensiva? Nefrología Mexicana, 1990; 11(3 y 4): 79-83.

9. Gonzalo-Calvo-Vargas C, Parra-Carrillo JZ, Grover-Páez F, Fonseca-Reyes S. Changes in the costs of antihypertensive medications in a developing country. A study in Mexico comparing 1990 and 1996. American Journal of Hypertension 1998; 11: 487-493.

10. Mancia G et al. An ambulatory blood pressure monitoring Study of the comparative antihypertensive efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and valsartan. Blood Press Monit 2002; 7(2): 135-142.

11. Bobrie G et al. A home blood pressure monitoring study comparing the antihypertensive efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonist fixed combinations. Am J Hypertens 2005; 18(11): 1482-1488.

12. Oparil S, Guthrie R, Lewin A et al. An elective-titration study of the comparative effectiveness of two angiotensin II-receptor blockers, irbesartan and losartan. Clinical Therapeutics 1998; 20(3): 398-408.

13. Kassler-Taub K, Littlejohn T, Elliot W et al. Comparative efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and losartan in mild to moderate hypertension. American Journal of Hypertension 1998; 11: 445-453.

14. Negro R, Formoso G, Hassan H. The effects of irbesartan and telmisartan on metabolic parameters and blood pressure in obese, insulin resistance hypertensive patients. J Endocrinol. Invest 2006; 29: 957-961.

15. Black WC. The cost-effectiveness plane: a graphic representation of cost-effectiveness. Medical Decision Making 1990; 10: 212-215.