Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Littlewood KJ, Greiner W, Baum D, Zoellner Y (2007)
BMC Nephrology 8(1).

Download
OA
Journal Article | Published | English
Author
; ; ;
Abstract
Background: Systemic hypertension often accompanies chronic renal failure and can accelerate its progression to endstage renal disease (ESRD). Adjunctive moxonidine appeared to have benefits versus adjunctive nitrendipine, in a randomised double-blind six-month trial in hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure. To understand the longer term effects and costs of moxonidine, a decision analytic model was developed and a cost-effectiveness analysis performed. Methods: A Markov model was used to extrapolate results from the trial over three years. All patients started in a non- ESRD state. After each cycle, patients with a glomerular filtration rate below 15 ml/min had progressed to an ESRD state. The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on the Dutch healthcare perspective. The main outcome measure was incremental cost per life-year gained. The percentage of patients progressing to ESRD and cumulative costs were also compared after three years. In the base case analysis, all patients with ESRD received dialysis. Results: The model predicted that after three years, 38.9% (95%CI 31.8–45.8) of patients treated with nitrendipine progressed to ESRD compared to 7.5% (95%CI 3.5–12.7) of patients treated with moxonidine. Treatment with standard antihypertensive therapy and adjunctive moxonidine was predicted to reduce the number of ESRD cases by 81% over three years compared to adjunctive nitrendipine. The cumulative costs per patient were significantly lower in the moxonidine group €9,858 (95% CI 5,501–16,174) than in the nitrendipine group €37,472 (95% CI 27,957–49,478). The model showed moxonidine to be dominant compared to nitrendipine, increasing life-years lived by 0.044 (95%CI 0.020–0.070) years and at a cost-saving of €27,615 (95%CI 16,894–39,583) per patient. Probabilistic analyses confirmed that the moxonidine strategy was dominant over nitrendipine in over 98.9% of cases. The cumulative 3-year costs and LYL continued to favour the moxonidine strategy in all sensitivity analyses performed. Conclusion: Treatment with standard antihypertensive therapy and adjunctive moxonidine in hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure was predicted to reduce the number of new ESRD cases over three years compared to adjunctive nitrendipine. The model showed that adjunctive moxonidine could increase life-years lived and provide long term cost savings.
Publishing Year
ISSN
PUB-ID

Cite this

Littlewood KJ, Greiner W, Baum D, Zoellner Y. Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Nephrology. 2007;8(1).
Littlewood, K. J., Greiner, W., Baum, D., & Zoellner, Y. (2007). Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Nephrology, 8(1).
Littlewood, K. J., Greiner, W., Baum, D., and Zoellner, Y. (2007). Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Nephrology 8.
Littlewood, K.J., et al., 2007. Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Nephrology, 8(1).
K.J. Littlewood, et al., “Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis”, BMC Nephrology, vol. 8, 2007.
Littlewood, K.J., Greiner, W., Baum, D., Zoellner, Y.: Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMC Nephrology. 8, (2007).
Littlewood, Kavi J., Greiner, Wolfgang, Baum, Dominique, and Zoellner, York. “Adjunctive treatment with moxonidine versus nitrendipine for hypertensive patients with advanced renal failure: a cost-effectiveness analysis”. BMC Nephrology 8.1 (2007).
Main File(s)
Access Level
OA Open Access
Last Uploaded
2012-03-09 15:07:29

This data publication is cited in the following publications:
This publication cites the following data publications:

1 Citation in Europe PMC

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.

A review of the costs and cost effectiveness of interventions in chronic kidney disease: implications for policy.
Menzin J, Lines LM, Weiner DE, Neumann PJ, Nichols C, Rodriguez L, Agodoa I, Mayne T., Pharmacoeconomics 29(10), 2011
PMID: 21671688

30 References

Data provided by Europe PubMed Central.

The renoprotective effect of combined antihypertensive drugs.
Del Vecchio L, Locatelli F., J. Nephrol. 14(1), 2001
PMID: 11281347
Is it the agent or the blood pressure level that matters for renal protection in chronic nephropathies?
Locatelli F, Del Vecchio L, D'Amico M, Andrulli S., J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 13 Suppl 3(), 2002
PMID: 12466314
The cost-effectiveness of early surgery versus watchful waiting in the management of small abdominal aortic aneurysms
Katz DA, Cronenwett JL., 1994
The renal arterial resistance index and renal allograft survival.
Radermacher J, Mengel M, Ellis S, Stuht S, Hiss M, Schwarz A, Eisenberger U, Burg M, Luft FC, Gwinner W, Haller H., N. Engl. J. Med. 349(2), 2003
PMID: 12853584

Export

0 Marked Publications

Open Data PUB

Sources

PMID: 17645811
PubMed | Europe PMC

Search this title in

Google Scholar