The value of clopidogrel in addition to standard therapy in reducing atherothrombotic events

The recent multinational, randomised, prospective studies Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events (CURE), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention substudy of CURE (PCI-CURE) and Clopidogrel for the Reduction of Events During Observation (CREDO) have demonstrated the clinical efficacy and safety of clopidogrel for the treatment of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS), including those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. In these settings, clopidogrel significantly reduces the risk of atherothrombotic events, with relative risk reductions of 20-30% (absolute risk reduction 1.9-3.0%). Health economic evaluations based on data from these studies conducted in Europe and the United States have clearly demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of clopidogrel in combination with aspirin compared with aspirin alone for the management of ACS. Within-trial evaluations based on CURE and PCI-CURE data showed that treatment with clopidogrel on top of standard therapy reduced the cost of initial hospitalisation as well as the total cost associated with hospitalisations. Long-term economic analyses based on the CURE study demonstrate that clopidogrel is cost saving in the Netherlands and that the cost per life-year gained (LYG) in other European countries is between Euros 549 and Euros 5048. In the United States, the cost per LYG for clopidogrel has been assessed at US dollars 6173 on the basis of CURE, US dollars 5910 for PCI-CURE and US dollars 3685 for CREDO, all of which are considerably lower than that associated with common cardiovascular benchmarks. The results are robust and consistent across different countries using varying costing strategies and estimates of survival. In conclusion, these data demonstrate that clopidogrel in combination with aspirin for the management of ACS is both clinically effective and cost-effective in this setting.     

Clopidogrel: a review of its use in the prevention of atherothrombosis

Clopidogrel is an ADP receptor antagonist that is indicated for the reduction of atherosclerotic events including myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke and vascular death in patients with atherosclerosis manifested by recent stroke, myocardial infarction or established peripheral vascular disease. In the 19 185 patients enrolled in the multicentre, randomised double-blind CAPRIE study, the annual risk of the combined end-point of ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction and death from vascular disease (vascular death) was significantly lower during treatment with clopidogrel 75 mg/day than aspirin 325 mg/day [5.3 vs 5.8%/year, respectively; relative risk reduction (RRR) 8.7%, p = 0.043] after a mean follow-up of 1.9 years. Clopidogrel provided even greater reductions in the risk of recurrent ischaemic events than aspirin in patients with a history of coronary artery bypass surgery, diabetes mellitus and in those receiving concomitant lipid-lowering therapy. Moreover there was a significant reduction in the incidence of hospitalisation in patients treated with clopidogrel. In a patient population (Saskatchewan, Canada) with a greater risk of ischaemic events than the CAPRIE study population, the number of patients needed to be treated with clopidogrel to prevent 1 ischaemic event was estimated to be 70 (vs 200 in the CAPRIE study). In randomised trials and registry surveys, clopidogrel 75 mg/day plus aspirin had similar efficacy (as measured by adverse cardiac outcomes) to ticlopidine 250mg twice daily plus aspirin during the 30 days after placement of intracoronary stents. Tolerability of clopidogrel was significantly better than ticlopidine in the randomised, double-blind CLASSICS study. Among patients treated with clopidogrel or aspirin in the CAPRIE study, the overall gastrointestinal tolerability of clopidogrel was generally better than that of aspirin; the frequency of gastrointestinal haemorrhage was significantly lower among patients treated with clopidogrel than aspirin. Diarrhoea, rash and pruritis were significantly more common with clopidogrel than aspirin. CONCLUSION: Clopidogrel was significantly more effective than aspirin in the prevention of vascular events (ischaemic stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death) [corrected] in patients with atherothrombotic disease manifested by recent myocardial infarction, recent ischaemic stroke or symptomatic peripheral arterial occlusive disease [corrected] in the CAPRIE study. The overall tolerability profile of the drug was similar to that of aspirin, although gastrointestinal haemorrhage occurred significantly less often in clopidogrel recipients. The drug is widely used in combination with aspirin for the prevention of atherothrombosis after placement of intravascular stents, and available data suggest that this combination is as effective as ticlopidine plus aspirin for this indication.     

Prevention of coronary heart disease with aspirin and clopidogrel: efficacy, safety, costs and cost-effectiveness

Atherothrombotic coronary artery disease is the single most common cause of death worldwide and a growing public health problem. Platelets play a central role in the pathogenesis of atherothrombosis and are therefore commonly targeted by one or more antiplatelet drugs as part of primary and secondary atherothrombosis prevention strategies. Aspirin reduces the risk of serious vascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death) by approximately 20% in a broad range of high-risk patients and remains the first-line antiplatelet drug because of its relative safety, low cost and cost-effectiveness. Compared with aspirin alone, clopidogrel reduces the risk of serious vascular events by approximately 10% and the combination of aspirin and clopidogrel reduces the risk by approximately 20% in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. Clopidogrel has a similar safety profile to aspirin but clopidogrel tablets are substantially more expensive. However, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of clopidogrel compared with aspirin is favourable, particularly in high-risk patients and is intermediate compared with a range of other effective therapeutic strategies for the treatment of coronary heart disease. Clopidogrel should be considered as a replacement for aspirin in patients who are allergic to aspirin, cannot tolerate aspirin, have experienced a recurrent atherothrombotic vascular event whilst taking aspirin and are at very high absolute risk of a serious vascular event (e.g., > 20%/year). The combination of clopidogrel and aspirin should be considered in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.     

Clopidogrel: new preparation. An alternative to aspirin

(1) Clopidogrel, an antiplatelet drug chemically similar to ticlopidine, is marketed in France for secondary prevention of thrombotic complications in patients with a history of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke or peripheral arterial disease. (2) Marketing authorisation was based mainly on the CAPRIE trial, a study that involved 19,815 patients. In this trial of secondary cardiovascular prevention, clopidogrel was slightly more effective than aspirin (325 mg/day) according to a statistical analysis of a combined end point (ischaemic stroke, or myocardial infarction, or death of vascular causes). The difference was more marked in the subgroup of patients with obstructive arterial disease of the lower limbs. (3) Clopidogrel was well tolerated in this trial. The only adverse effects more frequent on clopidogrel than on aspirin were rash and diarrhoea. (4) Clopidogrel showed no haematological toxicity, an adverse effect that restricts the use of ticlopidine. (5) The lack of long-term follow-up in real clinical settings prevents any meaningful estimation of the safety profile or of the risk of drug interactions.     

Drug evaluation of clopidogrel in patients with ischemic stroke

Clopidogrel is an effective antiplatelet medication used for the secondary prevention of ischemic events in patients with various cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and peripheral vascular disease conditions. The objective of this paper is to discuss the role of clopidogrel in ischemic stroke patients and to review the existing data from randomized trials supplemented by pilot and mechanistic studies that supports these indications for its use. An analysis of the mechanism of action and pharmacology of clopidogrel is provided. After Phase III trials, such as the CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events) and MATCH (Management of Atherothrombosis with Clopidogrel in High-risk patients) trials, the role of clopidogrel in secondary prevention is well defined. The role of clopidogrel in acute ischemic stroke and neurointerventional procedures is evolving based on new pilot trials. At present, there is insufficient data to recommend the use of clopidogrel in acute ischemic stroke. Clopidogrel may be a valuable alternative to aspirin. However, more studies are required to assess the role of clopidogrel in selected patient groups with respect to acute ischemic stroke.     

Drug evaluation of clopidogrel in patients with ischemic stroke

Clopidogrel is an effective antiplatelet medication used for the secondary prevention of ischemic events in patients with various cardiovascular, cerebrovascular and peripheral vascular disease conditions. The objective of this paper is to discuss the role of clopidogrel in ischemic stroke patients and to review the existing data from randomized trials supplemented by pilot and mechanistic studies that supports these indications for its use. An analysis of the mechanism of action and pharmacology of clopidogrel is provided. After Phase III trials, such as the CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events) and MATCH (Management of Atherothrombosis with Clopidogrel in High-risk patients) trials, the role of clopidogrel in secondary prevention is well defined. The role of clopidogrel in acute ischemic stroke and neurointerventional procedures is evolving based on new pilot trials. At present, there is insufficient data to recommend the use of clopidogrel in acute ischemic stroke. Clopidogrel may be a valuable alternative to aspirin. However, more studies are required to assess the role of clopidogrel in selected patient groups with respect to acute ischemic stroke.     

Clopidogrel: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes

Clopidogrel (Plavix) is a selective inhibitor of adenosine diphosphate-induced platelet aggregation. In patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) [unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction], clopidogrel plus aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) for up to 1 year significantly reduced the risk of cardiovascular events relative to placebo plus aspirin in the well designed clinical trial CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events) and its substudy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) [PCI-CURE]. In pharmacoeconomic evaluations based on data from these trials conducted in a number of countries that used a variety of models, methods and/or type of costs, clopidogrel plus aspirin was consistently predicted to be cost effective relative to aspirin alone in the management of patients with ACS, including those undergoing PCI. Clopidogrel plus aspirin in patients with ACS reduced the incremental cost per cardiovascular event prevented and/or life-year gained (LYG) relative to aspirin alone in analyses using within-trial data (including longer-term analyses incorporating life-expectancy estimates) from the CURE or PCI-CURE studies. In Markov models of cost effectiveness with a lifetime horizon from a healthcare payer perspective based on the CURE trial, relative to aspirin alone, clopidogrel plus aspirin for 1 year was predicted to have incremental costs per LYG of 8132Euro in Spain (2003 values) and 1365Euro in Sweden (2000 values). In similar Swedish analyses from a healthcare payer perspective, clopidogrel plus aspirin for 1 year was predicted to have incremental costs per LYG of 10,993Euro (2004 values) relative to aspirin alone based on data from the PCI-CURE substudy. Broadly similar results have also been reported in modelled analyses from other countries. Cost-utility analyses based on the CURE trial suggest that, relative to lifelong aspirin alone, clopidogrel plus aspirin for 1 year followed by aspirin alone is associated with incremental costs per QALY gained that are below the traditional threshold of cost utility in Spain, the UK and the US. In patients with ACS, including those undergoing PCI, the addition of clopidogrel to standard therapy with aspirin is clinically effective in preventing cardiovascular events. Available pharmacoeconomic data from several countries, despite some inherent limitations, support the use of clopidogrel plus aspirin for up to 1 year as a cost-effective treatment relative to aspirin alone in this patient population.     

Oral antiplatelet therapy in secondary prevention of cardiovascular events: an assessment from the payer's perspective

BACKGROUND: A wide variety of oral antiplatelet trials have been carried out, and a large number of cost-effectiveness estimates based on them have been published. OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost effectiveness of oral antiplatelet treatments in the prevention of cardiovascular events. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was carried out in PubMed and the Cochrane Library and the data reviewed. Cost-effectiveness or cost-utility studies of oral antiplatelets published since 2000 were selected. Cost-effectiveness analyses from the perspective of the UK NHS were then carried out using a Markov model with a 6-month cycle length and a lifetime horizon. Inputs from the CAPRIE, CHARISMA, (PCI)-CURE, CREDO, COMMIT, CLARITY, ESPS 2 and ESPRIT trials were included. All estimates of cost found (per event avoided, per QALY gained or per life-year gained) were included. Results were analysed in light of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the use of antiplatelets for the prevention of cardiovascular events and all estimates were updated to pound (year 2006 values) for easy comparison. RESULTS: Of the initial 141 studies found, 21 were included in the initial review. The literature and the Markov model subsequently used suggest that aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) dominates placebo for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events, as it is effective, is also less costly and is as well tolerated as placebo. Additionally, in periods or patients with elevated risk, more intensive treatment with clopidogrel (alone or together with aspirin) is cost effective compared with aspirin alone for the secondary prevention of ischaemic events. For secondary stroke prevention, combination therapy with aspirin and dipyridamole has a favourable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) when compared with aspirin alone and, based on an indirect comparison, also when compared with clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS: The cost-effectiveness estimates presented in this article support the NICE guidelines for the use of antiplatelets for the prevention of cardiovascular events. Based on these pharmacoeconomic data alone, aspirin should be prescribed for primary or secondary prevention among patients at high risk of cardiovascular events, dipyridamole for the secondary prevention of stroke (for a maximum of 5 years), and clopidogrel for the treatment of symptomatic cardiovascular disease or acute coronary syndrome (for a maximum of 2 years). The cost effectiveness of antiplatelets hinges on the patient's initial risk, the risk reduction associated with treatment, and the price of the treatment. Evidence suggests that the cost effectiveness of antiplatelets can be optimized by individualising the treatment decision based on patient risk and expected risk reduction.     

The Role of Oral Antiplatelet Agents in Atherothrombotic Disease

Atherothrombosis involves the mutually interactive dual mechanistic processes of atherosclerotic plaque progression and thrombus formation. In the setting of acute plaque rupture, resultant thrombus formation precipitates acute ischemic events such as acute coronary syndromes (ACS), stroke, and transient ischemic attack. Peripheral arterial disease is also a manifestation of atherothrombotic disease, and occurs both acutely and as a result of underlying disease progression. Atherothrombotic disease is highly prevalent and imposes a substantial burden on the community. For example, coronary artery disease was the single greatest cause of mortality among men and women in the US and accounted for an estimated US dollars 142.1 billion in health costs in 2005. Activated platelets are the prime mediators of arterial thrombus formation. This review discusses the evidence supporting the use of oral antiplatelet agents with other risk prevention strategies in the long-term secondary prevention of atherothrombotic disease. The most widely used oral antiplatelet agent is aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), and both aspirin and clopidogrel have proven roles in the management of atherothrombotic disease. Clopidogrel should also be used in combination with aspirin in patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Recent data suggest that clopidogrel may have a significant role, with or without fibrinolytic therapy, in the immediate management of ST-segment elevation ACS.     

Clopidogrel: a review of its use in the prevention of thrombosis

Clopidogrel (Plavix), Iscover) selectively and irreversibly inhibits adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation. Long-term administration of clopidogrel was associated with a modest but statistically significant advantage over aspirin in reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with established cardiovascular disease in the CAPRIE trial. In other large well designed multicentre trials, such as CURE, COMMIT and CLARITY-TIMI 28, the addition of clopidogrel to aspirin therapy improved outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes. However, some issues regarding the use of clopidogrel remain unresolved, such as the optimal loading dose in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and the optimal treatment duration following drug-eluting intracoronary stent placement. Results of several large randomised trials, therefore, have established clopidogrel as an effective and well tolerated antiplatelet agent for the secondary prevention of ischaemic events in patients with various cardiovascular conditions, including those with ischaemic stroke or acute coronary syndromes. In addition, treatment guidelines from the US and Europe acknowledge the importance of clopidogrel in contemporary cardiovascular medicine.     

Clopidogrel: a selective inhibitor of platelet ADP receptors

Platelets play a key role in the development of ischemic complications in the arterial circulation. Antiplatelet therapy has proven effective in the treatment and prevention of ischemic events. Numerous clinical studies have confirmed the therapeutic efficacy of aspirin to such a point that this antiplatelet agent has become the gold standard in clinical practice. Clopidogrel is a thienopyridine compound that inhibits platelet aggregation by selectively binding to adenylate cyclase-coupled ADP receptors. Results of a large, double-blind, randomized study (CAPRIE) confirm that administration of clopidogrel to patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease is more effective than aspirin in reducing the combined risk of ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction or vascular death. The present article highlights the importance of activation of platelets through ADP receptors and reviews the pharmacology and clinical studies of clopidogrel, a selective inhibitor of these mechanisms.     

The basis of platelets: platelets and atherothrombosis: an understanding of the lack of efficacy of aspirin in peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and diabetic patients

Platelet activation subsequent to the adhesion of platelets to the vascular wall results in the release of mediators that promote platelet aggregation, which plays a pivotal role in the development of the polyvascular atherosclerotic disease that can be referred to by the acronym 'ATIS' (AtheroThrombosIS). The currently available antiplatelet drugs used to prevent vascular events in patients with cardiovascular disease, including peripheral arterial disease (PAD), include aspirin and thienopyridines such as clopidogrel. These drugs decrease platelet aggregability, each of them by inhibiting a different pathway of platelet activation and recruitment. Aspirin acts by inhibiting thromboxane A2 (TXA2) formation through the inhibition (acetylation) of cyclo-oxygenase. On the other hand, thienopyridines suppress the platelet aggregation adenosine diphosphate (ADP) pathway by inhibiting the platelet P2Y12 subtype of the ADP receptor. The results of the large ATT (Antithrombotic Trialists' Collaboration) meta-analysis of published clinical studies on aspirin, reported in 2002, confirmed the previous meta-analysis and major trials that treatment with aspirin (mixed with other antiplatelet agents in these large meta-analyses) can prevent vascular events in high-risk patients with cardiovascular disease. However, it must be stressed that specifically in PAD patients no significant effect of aspirin was demonstrated in a more recent meta-analysis. This was also the case for primary and secondary prevention in diabetic patients. In keeping with these observations, neither a five-year follow-up study of Japanese diabetic patients in the JPAD (Japanese Primary Prevention of Atherosclerosis with Aspirin for Diabetes) study, a seven-year follow-up study of UK diabetic patients with PAD in the POPADAD (Prevention of Progression of Arterial Disease and Diabetes) study, nor a very recent Scottish study in the same population of diabetics with PAD revealed a significant beneficial effect for aspirin in preventing ischaemic events. This failure may be a consequence of more rapid recovery of platelet aggregability following each dose of aspirin in these PAD or diabetic populations, with the accelerated platelet turnover resulting in a condition of aspirin resistance. Results of the large scale CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischaemic Events) trial that evaluated clopidogrel in patients with cerebral infarction, myocardial infarction or PAD have found clopidogrel to be significantly more effective than aspirin in preventing ischaemic events in patients with PAD. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of the study has confirmed the efficacy of clopidogrel in diabetic patients with PAD, showing a significant reduction of events in clopidogrel-treated, compared with aspirin-treated, diabetic patients. These results are also likely to be attributable to the greater frequency of aspirin resistance in aspirin-treated patients in these populations (diabetics and/or PAD). Platelets, through activation and aggregation, have an important role in ATIS. However, although antiplatelet therapy with low-dose aspirin has been reported to prevent vascular events in high-risk patients with cardiovascular disease, recent studies in patients with PAD or diabetes mellitus have failed to support the efficacy of aspirin in preventing vascular events in these patient populations. In contrast, clopidogrel appears to be a useful antiplatelet agent in the prevention of vascular events in patients with PAD or diabetes.     

Clopidogrel hydrogen sulphate for atrial fibrillation

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation is a common cardiac rhythm abnormality with a considerable cardiovascular disease burden worldwide. It is an independent major risk factor for stroke. Stroke prevention with anticoagulation or antiplatelet agents has been an important area of clinical research. Warfarin is the most widely used antithrombotic therapy for stroke prophylaxis for last several years, and now dabigatran (150 mg b.i.d.) is more effective than warfarin in stroke prevention in individuals at increased of stroke. In addition, several studies have evaluated the efficacy of clopidogrel for stroke prophylaxis either alone or in combination with aspirin. AREAS COVERED: This review summarizes the key findings of the trials looking at the efficacy of clopidogrel in stroke prevention. A literature search was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. The trials that evaluated the efficacy of clopidogrel in preventing atherothrombotic events or stroke were also included. EXPERT OPINION: Clopidogrel prevents more vascular events, including stroke, in patients with a recent myocardial infarction, stroke or peripheral vascular disease than aspirin. Combination of clopidogrel and aspirin provides a greater reduction of stroke than aspirin or clopidogrel monotherapy, but at an increased risk of bleeding. Dual antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel and aspirin) is inferior to warfarin in primary stroke prevention for patient with atrial fibrillation and thus should be considered for stroke prophylaxis only in patients ineligible for warfarin. However, with the advent of newer agents, like direct thrombin inhibitors and Factor Xa inhibitors, the role of antiplatelet therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation remains unclear.     

Clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients with atherothrombosis: CAPRIE-based calculation of cost-effectiveness for Germany

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To model the 2-year cost-effectiveness of secondary prevention with clopidogrel versus aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid) (ASS) in German patients with myocardial infarction (MI), ischaemic stroke (IS) or diagnosed with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), based on CAPRIE trial data and from the perspective of German third party payers (TPP).

Methods: An existing Markov model was adapted to Germany by using German cost data. The model was extended by using different datasets for cardiovascular event survival times (Framingham vs. Saskatchewan health databases) and in two separate scenarios.

Results: The treatment with clopidogrel leads to a reduction of 13.19 vascular events per 1000 patients, of which 2.21 are vascular deaths. The overall incremental costs for the 2-year management of atherothrombotic patients with clopidogrel instead of ASS are calculated to be about €1 241 440 per 1000 patients. The number of life-years saved (LYS) has been calculated as the difference in the number of life-years lost due to vascular death or events with ASS versus clopidogrel: it is 86.35 LYS when analysis is based on Framingham data and 66.07 LYS with Saskatchewan-based survival data. The incremental costs per LYS are €14 380 and €18 790, respectively. Cost-effectiveness is sensitive to changes in survival data, discounting and daily costs of clopidogrel, but stable against substantial (± 25%) changes in all other cost data.

Conclusion: The findings for Germany are in line with published results for Belgium (€13 390 per LYS) and also with results for Italy (€17 500 per LYS), both based on Saskatchewan data, and with a French analysis based on Framingham data (€15 907 per LYS). Even if no officially accepted cost-effectiveness threshold exists for Germany at present, incremental cost-effectiveness results of less than €20 000 per LYS for the treatment with clopidogrel can be assumed to be acceptable for German third party payers.     

Modelling the long term cost effectiveness of clopidogrel for the secondary prevention of occlusive vascular events in the UK

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long term cost effectiveness of clopidogrel monotherapy compared with acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin; ASA) monotherapy in patients at risk of secondary occlusive vascular events (OVEs) in the UK. DESIGN: Cost utility analysis based on clinical data from CAPRIE (a multicentre randomised controlled trial, involving 19185 patients); long-term effects were extrapolated beyond the trial period using a Markov model populated with data from UK observational studies. Health economic evaluation carried out from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS: A representative cohort of 1000 UK patients aged 60 years (approximate mean age of the CAPRIE population), with the qualifying diagnoses of myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke and peripheral arterial disease, who are at risk of secondary OVEs (non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or vascular death). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were assumed to receive treatment with either clopidogrel (75 mg/day) for 2 years followed by ASA (325 mg/day, average) for their remaining lifetime, or ASA alone (325 mg/day, average) for life. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost per life year gained and incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: In the base case, the incremental cost effectiveness of clopidogrel versus ASA in this population is estimated at 18888 pounds per life year gained and 21 489 pounds per QALY gained. Multiple deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggest the model is robust to variations in a wide range of input parameters. CONCLUSION: Two years of treatment with clopidogrel can be considered a cost effective intervention in patients at risk of secondary OVEs in the UK.     

Cost effectiveness of ramipril in patients at high risk for cardiovascular events : economic evaluation of the HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation) study for Germany from the Statutory Health Insurance perspective

BACKGROUND: In the HOPE (Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation) trial, ramipril (compared with placebo) significantly reduced cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality as well as the incidence of costly cardiovascular events, such as myocardial infarction, revascularisation, stroke, cardiac arrest, hospitalisation due to heart failure and worsening angina pectoris, new-onset diabetes mellitus and microvascular diabetic complications. OBJECTIVE: Data from the HOPE study were used in a cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the additional cost per life-year gained (LYG) when the ACE inhibitor ramipril was added to the current medication of patients at high risk for cardiovascular events. The aim was to establish the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ramipril versus placebo from the perspective of the Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) provider in Germany, for both the study population as a whole and for the subgroup of patients with diabetes. DESIGN: A modelling approach was used, based on secondary analysis of published data and retrospective application of costs. In the base-case analysis, average case-related expenses of the SHI were applied and LYG were quantified using the average of the difference between the survival rates in the ramipril and placebo groups during the HOPE trial. LYG beyond the trial duration were estimated by the method of declining exponential approximation of life expectancy. RESULTS: After a treatment period of 4.5 years, the ICER of ramipril versus placebo was Euros 4074/LYG and Euros 2486/LYG (discounted at 5% per annum and in 1998-2002 values; Euro 1 approximately USD 0.88; first quarter 2002 values) for the HOPE study population as a whole and the subgroup of patients with diabetes, respectively. To test the model's robustness, the influence of the model variables on the results was quantified using a deterministic model, and a best-case/worst-case scenario analysis. The effect of random variables was investigated in a Monte Carlo simulation. The acquisition cost for ramipril had the greatest impact on the ICER of ramipril (2.2-fold greater than the impact of the number of LYG). In 95% of the 10,000 simulation steps, the ICER of ramipril after 4.5 years of treatment was between Euros 1290 and Euros 9005 per LYG for the entire HOPE study population and between Euros 290 and Euros 6115 per LYG in the diabetic subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this evaluation suggest that ramipril is likely to be cost effective in secondary prevention of cardiovascular events from the perspective of the SHI (third-party payer) in Germany. The estimated ICER of ramipril compares well with other ICERs of widely accepted treatments used for the management of cardiovascular diseases, such as HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors.     

Clopidogrel in secondary ischemic stroke prevention

The results obtained in the CAPRIE study in 1996 led to the introduction of the clopidogrel as a new antiplatelet drug in the secondary prevention of acute myocardial infarct (AMI), ischemic stroke (IS) and symptomatic peripheral artery disease (PAD). Clopidogrel showed a similar efficacy and safety than acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). More recently, the combined use of clopidogrel with ASA has evidenced a better protection than ASA alone in some patients: patients with past history of AMI, angina pectoris, intermittent claudication or PAD, IS or TIA, coronary bypass, and diabetes mellitus, patients on treatment with statins, and patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis >/=50%. We review the reported evidence on the efficacy of clopidogrel in the secondary prevention of ischemic stroke.     

Clopidogrel hydrogen sulphate for atrial fibrillation

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation is a common cardiac rhythm abnormality with a considerable cardiovascular disease burden worldwide. It is an independent major risk factor for stroke. Stroke prevention with anticoagulation or antiplatelet agents has been an important area of clinical research. Warfarin is the most widely used antithrombotic therapy for stroke prophylaxis for last several years, and now dabigatran (150 mg b.i.d.) is more effective than warfarin in stroke prevention in individuals at increased of stroke. In addition, several studies have evaluated the efficacy of clopidogrel for stroke prophylaxis either alone or in combination with aspirin.

Areas covered: This review summarizes the key findings of the trials looking at the efficacy of clopidogrel in stroke prevention. A literature search was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. The trials that evaluated the efficacy of clopidogrel in preventing atherothrombotic events or stroke were also included.

Expert opinion: Clopidogrel prevents more vascular events, including stroke, in patients with a recent myocardial infarction, stroke or peripheral vascular disease than aspirin. Combination of clopidogrel and aspirin provides a greater reduction of stroke than aspirin or clopidogrel monotherapy, but at an increased risk of bleeding. Dual antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel and aspirin) is inferior to warfarin in primary stroke prevention for patient with atrial fibrillation and thus should be considered for stroke prophylaxis only in patients ineligible for warfarin. However, with the advent of newer agents, like direct thrombin inhibitors and Factor Xa inhibitors, the role of antiplatelet therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation remains unclear.     

Antiplatelet therapy in peripheral arterial disease

Antiplatelet therapy significantly reduces the incidence of vascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and intermittent claudication, in patients undergoing peripheral grafting, in patients undergoing peripheral angioplasty, and in patients with carotid disease. Aspirin, aspirin plus dipyridamole, ticlodipine, and clopidogrel have been shown to be efficacious in the treatment of PAD. Data from the Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk for Ischaemic Events (CAPRIE) trial demonstrated in 11,592 patients with PAD that patients randomized to clopidogrel 75 mg daily had a 24% significant (p=0.0028) reduction in vascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke than patients randomized to aspirin 325 mg daily. These data favor the use of clopidogrel in patients with PAD.     

Clopidogrel Bisulfate

Clopidogrel bisulfate (hereafter, clopidogrel), a selective inhibitor of ADP-induced platelet aggregation, is approved for the reduction of atherothrombotic events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In COMMIT/CCS-2, a well designed trial in 45,852 adult patients with STEMI, relative to aspirin alone, clopidogrel 75 mg/day plus aspirin treatment significantly reduced the risk of both coprimary endpoints: the composite endpoint of reinfarction, stroke, or death from any cause and the risk of death from any cause. Based on the findings of this trial, treating 1000 patients for approximately 2 weeks with clopidogrel is associated with nine fewer patient deaths, reinfarctions, or strokes during treatment. In CLARITY-TIMI 28, a well designed supportive study in 3491 adult patients with STEMI, clopidogrel plus aspirin reduced the odds that a composite primary endpoint event of an occluded infarct-related artery, recurrent myocardial infarction, or death from any cause would occur versus aspirin plus placebo. Clopidogrel treatment was generally well tolerated in these clinical trials, with no significant between-group difference in the rate of major bleeding in either trial. Experience in other patient populations (e.g. those with recent myocardial infarction, recent ischemic stroke, or established peripheral arterial disease) has shown that longer-term (< or =3 years) clopidogrel monotherapy is generally well tolerated.