Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cost-Effectiveness of Losartan Versus Atenolol in Treating Hypertension—An Analysis of the LIFE Study from a Swiss Perspective

  • Pharmaco-Economics and Pharmaco-Epidemiology
  • Published:
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aims: To determine the economic benefit of losartan versus atenolol in patients with essential hypertension from the perspective of the Swiss healthcare system.

Methods and results: The cost-effectiveness of losartan versus atenolol in the treatment of hypertension was analyzed by applying the results of the LIFE study to the Swiss healthcare system using a decision analysis framework.

The cost-effectiveness shows the losartan cohort to provide an additional life expectancy of 0.05 years per patient compared to the atenolol cohort, over a mean follow-up period of 4.8 years. Losartan therapy in hypertensive patients produced net cost savings of CHF 24 per patient and per 4.8 years compared to atenolol from the perspective of the Swiss health care system. This result was robust after varying costs of medication, stroke, myocardial infarction and life expectancy.

Conclusion: The use of a losartan-based regimen in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy in Switzerland is net cost-saving compared with a atenolol-based regimen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zerebrovaskuläre Arbeitsgruppe der Schweiz und Schweizerische Herzstiftung. Epidemiologie des Hirnschlages. Schweizerische ärztezeitung 2000;81:835–840.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Collins R, McMahon S. Blood pressure, antihypertensive drug treatment and risks of stroke and of coronary heart disease. Br Mod Bull 1994;50:272–298.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Goldberg AI, Dunlay MC, Sweet CS. Safety and tolerability of losartan potassium, an angiotensin II receptor antagonist, compared with hydrochlorothiazide, atenolol, felodipine ER, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for the treatment of systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol 1995;75:793–795.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Goa KL, Wagstaff AJ. Losartan potassium: A review of its pharmacology, clinical efficacy and tolerability in the management of hypertension. Drugs 1996;51:820–845.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dahlöf B, Lindholm LH. Losartan for cardiovascular disease in patients with and without diabetics in the LIFE study (author reply). Lancet 2002;359:2203–2204.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sandoz MS, Ess SM, Furrer J, Szucs TD. Medical economic benefits of losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy: The Renaal Study Economic Evaluation in the Swiss Healthcare Setting. Poster presented at European Congress on the Study of Diabetes, Budapest, 2002.

  7. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. LIFE Study Group. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): A randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002;23;359–:995.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dahlof B, Devereux R, de Faire U, et al. The Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction (LIFE) in Hypertension study: Rationale, design, and methods. The LIFE Study Group. Am J Hypertens 1997;10:705–713.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Swiss Drug Compendium 2003; Documed, Basel, 2003.

  10. Levy E, Gabriel S, Dinet J. The comparative medical costs of atherothrombotic disease in European countries. Pharmacoeconomics 2003;21:651–659.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Siegel JE, Weinstein MC, Russell LB, Gold MR, for the Panel on Cost Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Recommendations on reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. JAMA 1996;276:1339–1341.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Office of Social Insurance. Handbook for the Economic Assessment of Health-care Technologies. Bern, 2002.

  13. Beck JR, Kassirer JP, Pauker SG, et al. A convenient approximation of life expectancy—the DEALE. I. Validation of the method. Am J Med 1982;73,883–888.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Beck JR, Kassirer JP, Pauker SG, et al. A convenient approximation of life expectancy—The DEALE. II. Use in medical decision-making. Am J Med 1982;73:889–897.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Statistisches Jahrbuch der Schweiz, Verlag NZZ, Zürich, 2000.

  16. Naegeli B, Bertel O, Urban P, et al. Der akute Myokardinfarkt in der Schweiz: Resultate aus dem PIMICS-Herzinfarkt Register. Schweiz med Wschr 1998;128:729–736.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Devereux RB, Dahlof B, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular mortality in patients without pre-existing vascular disease in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE). Abstracts from American Heart Association Scientific Sessions 2002, November 17–20, 2002; Chicago, Illinois. Circulation 2002;106(suppl II):II-475. Abstract 2352.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schmitt-Koopmann I, Schwenkglenks M, Spinas G, Szucs TD. Direct medical costs of type 2 diabetes and its complications in Switzerland. European J Publ Health 2004;14(1):3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ess SM, Szucs TD. High dose lisinopril in heart failure: Economic considerations. Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy 2002;16:365–371.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Szucs T, Berger K, Schulte-Hillen, Kleber FX. Die Wirtschaftlichkeit von Captopril nach Myokardinfarkt. Med Klinik 1996;91:112–118.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Goldmann L, Sia STB, Cook EF, Rutherford JD, Weinstein MC. Costs and effectiveness of routine therapy with long-term beta-adreneric antagonists after acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1988;319:152–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Szucs TD, Bertel O, Darioli R, Gutzwiller F, Mordasini R. Ökonomische Evaluation von Pravastatin in der Behandlung der koronaren Sekundärprävention. Eine Analyse auf der Basis der LIPID Studie (Economical and pharmacological valuation of pravastatin in secondary coronary prevention). Schw Rundschau Med Praxis 2000;57:1667–1673.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Taylor WC, Pass TM, Shephard DS, Komaroff AL. Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol reduction for the primary prevention of coronary heart disease in men. Preventing disease: Beyond the rhetoric. New York: Springer, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cathomas G, Erne P, Schwenkglenks M, Szucs T. The economic efficiency of Amlodipine on the treatment of coronary Atherosclerosis—an analysis based on the PREVENT study. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 2002;16:61–66.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Stason WB, Weinstein MC. Allocation of resources to manage hypertension. N Engl J Med 1977;296:732–739.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Szucs TD, Müller D, Darioli R. Schweizer Analyse der ASCOT-Studie: Wie kosten-effektiv sind Statinen in der coronaren Prävention? Cardiovasc, 2003;5:29–32.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Haldemann R, Lüscher TF, Szucs TD. Die Wirtschaftlichkeit von Clopidogrel in der kardiovaskulären Sekundärprävention: eine Kosten-Effektivitäts-Analyse auf der Grundlage der CAPRIE-Studie. [Cost Effectiveness of Clopidogrel in the Secondary Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events] Praxis 2001;90:539–545.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mark DB, Hlatky MA, Califf RM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of thrombolytic therapy with tissue plasminogen activator as compared with streptokinase for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1995;332:1418–1431.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Social- and Preventive Medicine, University Zurich, Zurich

    Thomas D. Szucs MD, MBA, MPH

  2. Department of Internal Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne

    Michel Burnier

  3. Cardiology Department, Kantonsspital Luzern, Luzern

    Paul Erne

Authors
  1. Thomas D. Szucs MD, MBA, MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michel Burnier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Erne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas D. Szucs MD, MBA, MPH.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Szucs, T.D., Burnier, M. & Erne, P. Cost-Effectiveness of Losartan Versus Atenolol in Treating Hypertension—An Analysis of the LIFE Study from a Swiss Perspective. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther 18, 391–397 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-005-5064-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-005-5064-x

Key Words

Search

Navigation