Cost-utility of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-based treatment compared with thiazide diuretic-based treatment for hypertension in elderly Australians considering diabetes as comorbidity

Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Mar;94(9):e590. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000000590.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)-based treatment compared with thiazide diuretic-based treatment for hypertension in elderly Australians considering diabetes as an outcome along with cardiovascular outcomes from the Australian government's perspective.We used a cost-utility analysis to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Data on cardiovascular events and new onset of diabetes were used from the Second Australian National Blood Pressure Study, a randomized clinical trial comparing diuretic-based (hydrochlorothiazide) versus ACEI-based (enalapril) treatment in 6083 elderly (age ≥65 years) hypertensive patients over a median 4.1-year period. For this economic analysis, the total study population was stratified into 2 groups. Group A was restricted to participants diabetes free at baseline (n = 5642); group B was restricted to participants with preexisting diabetes mellitus (type 1 or type 2) at baseline (n = 441). Data on utility scores for different events were used from available published literatures; whereas, treatment and adverse event management costs were calculated from direct health care costs available from Australian government reimbursement data. Costs and QALYs were discounted at 5% per annum. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty around utilities and cost data.After a treatment period of 5 years, for group A, the ICER was Australian dollars (AUD) 27,698 (&OV0556; 18,004; AUD 1-&OV0556; 0.65) per QALY gained comparing ACEI-based treatment with diuretic-based treatment (sensitive to the utility value for new-onset diabetes). In group B, ACEI-based treatment was a dominant strategy (both more effective and cost-saving). On probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the ICERs per QALY gained were always below AUD 50,000 for group B; whereas for group A, the probability of being below AUD 50,000 was 85%.Although the dispensed price of diuretic-based treatment of hypertension in the elderly is lower, upon considering the potential enhanced likelihood of the development of diabetes in addition to the costs of treating cardiovascular disease, ACEI-based treatment may be a more cost-effective strategy in this population.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Age Factors
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors / economics*
  • Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors / therapeutic use
  • Australia
  • Cardiovascular Diseases / epidemiology
  • Comorbidity
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis
  • Diabetes Mellitus / drug therapy
  • Diabetes Mellitus / epidemiology*
  • Female
  • Hospitalization
  • Humans
  • Hydrochlorothiazide / economics
  • Hydrochlorothiazide / therapeutic use
  • Hypertension / drug therapy
  • Hypertension / epidemiology*
  • Male
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years
  • Sex Factors
  • Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors / economics*
  • Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors / therapeutic use

Substances

  • Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors
  • Sodium Chloride Symporter Inhibitors
  • Hydrochlorothiazide