Back to Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 4

Cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin in comparison with generic atorvastatin and simvastatin in a Swedish population at high risk of cardiovascular events

Authors Gandhi S, Jensen, Fox K, Smolen L , Olsson A, Paulsson

Received 30 September 2011

Accepted for publication 8 November 2011

Published 10 January 2012 Volume 2012:4 Pages 1—11


Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Sanjay K Gandhi1, Marie M Jensen2, Kathleen M Fox3, Lee Smolen4, Anders G Olsson5, Thomas Paulsson6
AstraZeneca LP, Wilmington, DE, USA; 2AstraZeneca, Lund, Sweden; 3Strategic HealthCare Solution, Monkton, MD; 4Medical Decision Modeling Inc, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 5Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linkoping University, and Stockholm Heart Center, Stockholm; 6AstraZeneca, Sodertalje, Sweden

Background: To assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin therapy compared with generic simvastatin and generic atorvastatin in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular events and mortality in a Swedish population with Framingham risk ≥20%.
Methods: A probabilistic Monte Carlo simulation model based on data from JUPITER (the Justification for the Use of statins in Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin) was used to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin 20 mg daily versus simvastatin or atorvastatin 40 mg for the prevention of cardiovascular death and morbidity. The three-stage model included cardiovascular event prevention simulating the 4 years of JUPITER, initial prevention beyond the trial, and subsequent cardiovascular event prevention. A Swedish health care payer perspective (direct costs only) was modeled for a lifetime horizon, with 2008/2009 as the costing period. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
Results: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained with rosuvastatin 20 mg over simvastatin or atorvastatin 40 mg ranged from SEK88,113 (rosuvastatin 20 mg versus simvastatin 40 mg; Framingham risk ≥30%; net avoidance of 34 events/1000 patients) to SEK497,542 (versus atorvastatin 40 mg: Framingham risk ≥20%; net avoidance of 11 events/1000 patients) over a lifetime horizon. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that at a willingness-to-pay threshold of SEK500,000/QALY, rosuvastatin 20 mg would be cost-effective for approximately 75%–85% of simulations relative to atorvastatin or simvastatin 40 mg. Sensitivity analyses indicated the findings to be robust.
Conclusion: Rosuvastatin 20 mg is cost-effective over a lifetime horizon compared with generic simvastatin or atorvastatin 40 mg in patients at high cardiovascular risk in Sweden.

Keywords: cardiovascular disease, cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness, rosuvastatin, simvastatin, atorvastatin, generic, high risk

Creative Commons License © 2012 The Author(s). This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.