Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Simvastatin After Orthotopic Heart Transplantation

Costs and Consequences

  • Original Research Article
  • Simvastatin After Heart Transplantation
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: Recent data indicate that the combination of a low cholesterol diet and simvastatin following heart transplantation is associated with significant reduction of serum cholesterol levels, lower incidence of graft vessel disease (GVD) and significantly superior 4-year survival rates than dietary treatment alone. On the basis of this first randomised long term study evaluating survival as the clinical end-point, we investigated the cost effectiveness of the above regimens as well as the long term consequences for the patient and for heart transplantation as a high-tech procedure.

Design and setting: The perspective of the economic analysis was that of the German health insurance fund. Life-years gained were calculated on the basis of the Kaplan-Meier survival curves from the 4-year clinical trial and from the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) overall survival statistics. Incremental costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were determined using various sources of data, and both costs and consequences were discounted by 3% per year. Sensitivity analyses using alternative assumptions were conducted in addition to the base-case analysis.

Patients and participants: As in the original clinical trial, the target population of the economic evaluation comprised all heart transplant recipients on standard triple immunosuppression consisting of cyclosporin, azathioprine and prednisolone, regardless of the postoperative serum lipid profile.

Interventions: The therapeutic regimens investigated in the analysis were the American Heart Association (AHA) step II diet plus simvastatin (titrated to a maximum dosage of 20 mg/day) and AHA step II diet alone.

Main outcome measures and results: Four years of treatment with simvastatin (mean dosage 8.11 mg/day) translated into an undiscounted survival benefit per patient of 2.27 life-years; 0.64 life-years within the trial period and 1.63 life-years thereafter. Discounted costs per year of life gained were $US1050 (sensitivity analyses $US800 to $US15 400) for simvastatin plus diet versus diet alone and $US18 010 (sensitivity analyses $US17 130 to $US21 090) for heart transplantation plus simvastatin versus no transplantation (all costs reflect 1997 values; $US1 = 1.747 Deutschmarks).

Conclusions: Prevention of GVD with simvastatin after heart transplantation was cost effective in all the scenarios examined with impressive prolongation of life expectancy for the heart recipient. Simvastatin also achieved an internationally robust 21% improvement in the cost effectiveness of heart transplantation compared with historical cost-effectiveness data.

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. ISHLT 14th Annual Data Report. Available from: URL: (http://www.richmond.infi.net/~ishlt/ishlt_97/cause.html#heart_lung) [accessed 1997 Jul 8]

  2. Eich D, Thompson JA, Ko DJ, et al. Hypercholesterolemia in long-term survivors of heart transplantation: an early marker of accelerated coronary artery disease. J Heart Lung Transplant 1991; 10: 45–9

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sharples LD, Caine N, Mullins P, et al. Risk factor analysis for the major hazards following heart transplantation: rejection, infection, and coronary occlusive disease. Transplantation 1991; 52: 244–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Ballantyne CM, Radovancevic B, Farmer JA, et al. Hyperlipidemia after heart transplantation: report of a 6-year experience, with treatment recommendations. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 19 (6): 1315–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schröder JS, Gao SZ, Alderman EL, et al. A preliminary study of diltiazem in the prevention of coronary artery disease in heart-transplant recipients. N Engl J Med 1993; 328 (3): 164–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hidalgo L, Zambrana JL, Blanco-Molina A, et al. Lovastatin versus bezafibrate for hyperlipemia treatment after heart transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1995; 14 (3): 461–7

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Barbir M, Hunt B, Kushwaha S, et al. Maxepa versus bezafibrate in hyperlipidemic cardiac transplant recipients. Am J Cardiol 1992; 70: 1596–601

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kobashigawa JA, Katznelson S, Laks H, et al. Effects of pravastatin on outcomes after cardiac transplantation. N Engl J Med 1995; 33: 621–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Wenke K, Meiser B, Thiery J, et al. Simvastatin reduces graft vessel disease and mortality after heart transplantation: a fouryear randomized trial. Circulation 1997; 96 (5): 1398–402

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ballantyne C, Bourge RC, Domalik LJ, et al. Treatment of hyperlipidemia after heart transplantation and rationale for the heart transplant registry. Am J Cardiol 1996; 78: 532–5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Christopherson LK. Organ transplantation and artificial organs. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1986; 2: 553–62

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Evans RW. Organ transplantation and the inevitable debate as to what constitutes a basic health care benefit. In: Terasaki PI, Cecka JM, editors. Los Angeles (CA): UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory, 1993: 359–91

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gold MR, Russell LB, Soegel JE, et al., editors. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York (NY): Oxford University Press, 1996

    Google Scholar 

  14. ISHLT 14th Annual Data Report. Available from: URL: http://www.richmond.infi.net/~~ishlt/registry/survival.htm#surv_a1 [accessed 1996 Nov 21]

  15. Rote Liste 1997. Editio Cantor Verlag für Medizin und Naturwissenschaften GmbH. Aulendorf/Württemberg: ECV, 1997

  16. GOÄ und BG-GOÄ. Gebührenordnung für Ärzte (GOÄ). 8. Auflage. Dachau: Zauner Druck und Verlags GmbH, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  17. Haberman S. Heart transplants: putting a price on life. Health Soc Serv J 1982; 90: 877–9

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pennock JL, Oyer PE, Reitz BA, et al. Cardiac transplantation in perspective for the future: survival, complications, rehabilitation & cost. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1982; 83: 168–77

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. ISHLT 14th Annual Data Report. Available from: URL: http://www.richmond.infi.net/~ishlt/ishlt_97/surv_1.html#overall [accessed 1997 Jul 15]

  20. Scheld HH, Deng MC, Hammel D, et al. Kosten/Nutzen-Relation der Herztransplantation. Z Kardiol 1994; 83 Suppl. 6: 139–49

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. The CONSENSUS Trial Study Group. Effects of enalapril on mortality in severe congestive heart failure: results of the cooperative north scandinavian survival study. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 1429–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. van Hout B, Bonsel G, Habbema D, et al. Heart transplantation in the Netherlands: costs, effects and scenarios. J Health Econ 1993; 12: 73–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lee E. Statistical methods for survival data analysis. Belmont (CA): Wadsworth Inc., 1980: 162–7

    Google Scholar 

  24. 1997 Drug Topics Red Book. Montvale (NJ): Medical Economics Company, Inc., 1997

  25. The artificial heart: prototypes, policies, and patients. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1992: 268–9

  26. Sharples LD, Briggs A, Caine N, et al. A model for analyzing the cost of main clinical events after cardiac transplantation. Transplantation 1996; 62 (5): 615–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ammerman AS, Devellis RF, Keyserling TC, et al. Quality of life is not adversely affected by a dietary intervention to reduce cholesterol [abstract]. Circulation 1993; 87: 19

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lawrence WF, Fryback DG, Martin PA. Cholesterol and health status in the Beaver Dam Health Outcomes Study [abstract]. Med Decis Making 1994; 14: 436

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zimmermann R, Haverich A. Herztransplantation [editorial]. Fortschr Kardiol 1996; 1: 22

    Google Scholar 

  30. Anhang 1 (zu Artikel 1 Nr. 3) der Dritten Verordnung zur Änderung der Bundespflegesatzverordnung. Bundesgesetzblatt (BGBl.) I, Nr 68 vom 28. Köln: Bundesanzeiger Verlagsges mbH, 1995: 2006–12

  31. Statistisches Bundesamt. Statistisches Jahrbuch für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  32. United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS). UNOS OPTN/Scientific Registry data. Richmond (VA): UNOS, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hauboldt RH. Cost implications of human organ transplantations: an update. Brookfield (CT): Milliman and Robertson, Inc., 1993

    Google Scholar 

  34. Poirier VL. The economic burden of artificial hearts: progress in artificial organs. Cleveland (OH): ISAO Press, 1986: 96–9

    Google Scholar 

  35. Discounting health care: only a matter of timing? Lancet 1992; 340: 148–9

    Google Scholar 

  36. Smith PE, Eydelloth RS, Grossman SJ, et al. HMG-CoA-Reductase inhibitor induced myopathy in the rat: cyclosporine interaction and mechanism studies. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1991; 257: 1225–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Mauro VF. Clinical pharmacokinetics and practical applications of simvastatin. Clin Pharmacokinet 1993; 24: 195–202

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group. Randomized trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary artery disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 1994; 344: 1383–9

    Google Scholar 

  39. Jönsson B, Johannesson M, Kjekshus J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cholesterol lowering. Eur Heart J 1996; 17: 1001–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Malik IS, Anderson MH. Cost-efficacy of cholesterol lowering: West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study versus the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study [abstract]. Heart 1996; 75 Suppl. 1: 77

    Google Scholar 

  41. European Transplant Coordinators Organization (ETCO) Statistics. Available from: URL: http://www.kuleuven.ac.be [accessed 1997 Jul 8]

  42. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I, et al. Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. N Engl J Med 1995; 333 (20): 1301–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Institute of Medicine (IOM). National priorities for the assessment of clinical conditions and medical technologies. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1990

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Outcomes Research Department, MSD Sharp & Dohme GmbH, Haar, Germany

    Karl J. Krobot

  2. Department of Cardiac Surgery, Munich Bogenhausen, Munich, Germany

    Klaus Wenke

  3. Department of Cardiac Surgery, University Hospital, Munich-Grosshadern, Munich, Germany

    Bruno Reichart

Authors
  1. Karl J. Krobot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Klaus Wenke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bruno Reichart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krobot, K.J., Wenke, K. & Reichart, B. Simvastatin After Orthotopic Heart Transplantation. Pharmacoeconomics 15, 279–289 (1999). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915030-00007

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199915030-00007

Keywords

Search

Navigation