skip to content
Dovepress - Open Access to Scientific and Medical Research
View our mobile site

8129

Candesartan in heart failure: assessment of reduction in mortality and morbidity (CHARM) and resource utilization and costs in Italy

Original Research

(2428) Views  (599) Full article downloads

Authors: Giorgio L Colombo, Mauro Caruggi, Chiara Ottolini, Aldo P Maggioni

Published Date March 2008 Volume 2008:4(1) Pages 223 - 234
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/VHRM.S2446

Giorgio L Colombo1, Mauro Caruggi2, Chiara Ottolini3, Aldo P Maggioni4

1S.A.V.E. Studi Analisi Valutazioni Economiche, Milano, Italy; 2Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, Varese, Italy;3Azienda Ospedaliera di Busto Arsizio, Varese, Italy; 4ANMCO Research Center, Italian Association of Hospital Cardiologists, Firenze, Italy (CHARM Steering Committee Member)

Abstract: Chronic heart failure (HF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality particularly in the elderly and a growing healthcare burden in Italy. The objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of candesartan cilexetil, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker (ARB) for the treatment of HF. A pre-specified economic evaluation was conducted on resource utilization (cardiovascular drug treatment, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular hospital admission, cardiovascular procedures/operations) prospectively collected alongside the CHARM program, a series of parallel randomized clinical trials comparing candesartan with placebo (standard therapy) in patients with NYHA Class II-IV HF: CHARM-Alternative (LVEF ≤40% patients not receiving ACE inhibitors because of previous intolerance); CHARM-Added (LVEF ≤40% patients currently receiving ACE inhibitors); or CHARM-Preserved (LVEF ≥40% patients). The primary outcome for the component trials was the composite of cardiovascular death or worsening hospital admission for HF and of the overall program all-cause mortality. Adjunctive treatment with candesartan in CHARM-Alternative and CHARM-Added led to clinical benefits and to either cost-savings or a small additional cost, depending on the trial. The less certain clinical benefit in CHARM-Preserved was obtained at modest extra cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated to range from €713 per life year gained for CHARM-Alternative to dominant for CHARM-Added and the pooled reduced LVEF trials.

Keywords: candesartan, heart failure, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-consequence analysis, CHARM, Italy






 

Other articles by Professor Giorgio Colombo

Cost-effectiveness analysis of initial HIV treatment under Italian guidelines


A cost–utility analysis of etanercept for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis in Italy
A cost-effectiveness analysis of different therapies in patients with chronic hepatitis B in Italy
An economic evaluation of aripiprazole vs olanzapine adapted to the Italian setting using outcomes of metabolic syndrome and risk for diabetes in patients with schizophrenia
Assessment of acceptability and ease of use of atovaquone/proguanil medication in subjects undergoing malaria prophylaxis
Cost–utility analysis of prophylaxis versus treatment on demand in severe hemophilia A
Cost-effectiveness analysis of electrochemotherapy with the Cliniporator™ vs other methods for the control and treatment of cutaneous and subcutaneous tumors
Erratum: An economic evaluation of aripiprazole vs olanzapine adapted to the Italian setting using outcomes of metabolic syndrome and risk for diabetes in patients with schizophrenia. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, 4: 967–976
Moderate and severe plaque psoriasis: cost-of-illness study in Italy
  • Join ISVH

    Be part of the World's leading experts in vascular health by joining the International Society of Vascular Health (ISVH)

  • Testimonials

    "... I was impressed at the rapidity of publication from submission to final acceptance." Dr Edwin Thrower, PhD, Yale University