ArticleClinical drug investigation2022
Cost-Effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl, Evolocumab, Alirocumab, Ezetimibe, or Fenofibrate in Combination with Statins Compared to Statin Monotherapy.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Critical Systematic Review of Modelling Approaches and Methodologies used in Hyperlipidaemia Economic Evaluations.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Pooled it
- Indirect comparison of the efficacy and safety of alirocumab and evolocumab on major cardiovascular events: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Safety and Effectiveness of High-Intensity Statins Versus Low/Moderate-Intensity Statins Plus Ezetimibe in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease for Reaching LDL-C Goals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2024 · on this mapPooled it
- Lipid-lowering therapy in Switzerland: time trends in utilization and cost, 2015-2023.Lipids in health and disease · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Evolocumab or Inclisiran in Combination with Statins Versus Statin Monotherapy Among Patients with ASCVD in China.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Article
- Therapeutic Management of LDL-C: Efficacy and Economic Impact Assessment.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Assessing Omega-3 Therapy and Its Cardiovascular Benefits: What About Icosapent Ethyl? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Cost-Effectiveness of Icosapent Ethyl for Ischemic Cardiovascular Events.The journal of Tehran Heart Center · 2024Article
- PCSK9 inhibition: from effectiveness to cost-effectiveness.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Cost-effectiveness of Evolocumab in Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review.Current therapeutic research, clinical and experimental · 2024Review
- Are We Using Ezetimibe As Much As We Should?Biomarker insights · 2024Review
- Present and Future of Dyslipidaemia Treatment-A Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Established and Emerging Lipid-Lowering Drugs for Primary and Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2023Review
- Projected Outcomes of Optimized Statin and Ezetimibe Therapy in US Military Veterans with Coronary Artery Disease.JAMA network open · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite treatment with statins, dyslipidaemia patients with elevated cholesterol- and triglyceride-levels remain at high residual risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). New lipid-lowering drugs must prevent the occurrence of MACE and exhibit cost-effectiveness for their successful adoption to clinical practice.
objectiveTo assess the cost effectiveness of icosapent ethyl, fenofibrate, ezetimibe, evolocumab, and alirocumab in combination with statins compared to statin monotherapy for cardiovascular prevention from the perspective of UK's National Health Service.
methodsA Markov model simulated the progression of cardiovascular disease and MACE, including myocardial infarction, stroke, angina pectoris, and coronary revascularisation, in dyslipidaemia patients. The model was populated with cardiovascular outcome trial data for each drug. Cost and utility data were extracted from peer-reviewed literature. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is reported per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained in 2021 Great Britain Pounds (£).
resultsFor primary cardiovascular prevention, icosapent ethyl increased QALYs by 0.79 and costs by £15,421 compared to statin monotherapy (ICER = £19,485/QALY). Fenofibrate yielded 0.62 additional QALYs at cost-savings of - £6127 (ICER = - £9932/QALY). For secondary prevention, the omega-3 fatty acid icosapent ethyl extended QALYs by 0.98 at costs of £12,981 compared to statin monotherapy (ICER = £13,285/QALY). Fenofibrate added 0.85 QALYs whilst saving - £637 (ICER = - £7472/QALY). Ezetimibe increased QALYs by 0.60 at cost reductions of - £2529 (ICER = - £4231/QALY). PCSK9 inhibitors provided QALYs of 0.53 and 0.86 at costs of £45,279 and £46,375 for evolocumab (ICER = £85,193/QALY) and alirocumab (ICER = £54,211/QALY), respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of £25,000/QALY, there is a probability of 100% for icosapent ethyl (98% in primary prevention) and 0% for PCSK9 inhibitors to be cost effective in secondary prevention.
conclusionsIcosapent ethyl is cost effective for primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention at an annual price of £2064 in the UK. For PCSK9 inhibitors, price discounts or prescription restrictions are necessary to achieve cost effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.