Back to Journals » ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research » Volume 5

Cost-effectiveness of zofenopril in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction: a post hoc analysis of SMILE-4

Authors Borghi C, Ambrosioni E, Omboni S, Cicero AFG, Bacchelli S, Degli Esposti D, Novo S, Vinereanu D, Ambrosio G, Reggiardo G, Zava D

Received 22 January 2013

Accepted for publication 28 March 2013

Published 8 July 2013 Volume 2013:5 Pages 317—325

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S43138

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3

Claudio Borghi,1 Ettore Ambrosioni,1 Stefano Omboni,2 Arrigo FG Cicero,1 Stefano Bacchelli,1 Daniela Degli Esposti,1 Salvatore Novo,3 Dragos Vinereanu,4 Giuseppe Ambrosio,5 Giorgio Reggiardo,6 Dario Zava7

1Unit of Internal Medicine, Policlinico S Orsola, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy; 2Italian Institute of Telemedicine, Varese, Italy; 3Division of Cardiology, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy; 4University and Emergency Hospital, Bucharest, Romania; 5Division of Cardiology, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy; 6Mediservice, Milano, Italy; 7Istituto Lusofarmaco d'Italia SpA, Peschiera Borromeo, Italy

Background: In SMILE-4 (the Survival of Myocardial Infarction Long-term Evaluation 4 study), zofenopril + acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) was superior to ramipril + ASA in reducing the occurrence of major cardiovascular events in patients with left ventricular dysfunction following acute myocardial infarction. The present post hoc analysis was performed to compare the cost-effectiveness of zofenopril and ramipril.
Methods: In total, 771 patients with left ventricular dysfunction and acute myocardial infarction were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive zofenopril 60 mg/day (n = 389) or ramipril 10 mg/day (n = 382) + ASA 100 mg/day and were followed up for one year. The primary study endpoint was the one-year combined occurrence of death or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. The economic analysis was based on evaluation of cost of medications and hospitalizations and was applied to the intention-to-treat population (n = 716). Cost data were drawn from the National Health Service databases of the European countries participating in the study. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was used to quantify the cost per event prevented with zofenopril versus ramipril.
Results: Zofenopril significantly (P = 0.028) reduced the risk of the primary study endpoint by 30% as compared with ramipril (95% confidence interval, 4%–49%). The number needed to treat to prevent a major cardiovascular event with zofenopril was 13 less than with ramipril. The cost of drug therapies was higher with zofenopril (328.78 Euros per patient per year, n = 365) than with ramipril (165.12 Euros per patient per year, n = 351). The cost related to the occurrence of major cardiovascular events requiring hospitalization averaged 4983.64 Euros for zofenopril and 4850.01 Euros for ramipril. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for zofenopril versus ramipril was 2125.45 Euros per event prevented (worst and best case scenario in the sensitivity analysis was 3590.09 and 3243.96 Euros, respectively).
Conclusion: Zofenopril is a viable and cost-effective treatment for managing patients with left ventricular dysfunction after acute myocardial infarction.

Keywords: acute myocardial infarction, left ventricular dysfunction, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, zofenopril, ramipril, acetylsalicylic acid, cost-effectiveness

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php 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.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Other articles by this author:

Readers of this article also read:

A new recombinant factor VIII: from genetics to clinical use

Santagostino E

Drug Design, Development and Therapy 2014, 8:2507-2515

Published Date: 12 December 2014

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

A novel preparation method for silicone oil nanoemulsions and its application for coating hair with silicone

Hu Z, Liao M, Chen Y, Cai Y, Meng L, Liu Y, Lv N, Liu Z, Yuan W

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5719-5724

Published Date: 12 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010