Managing to low-density lipoprotein particles compared with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Background: Meta-analyses of clinical trials have shown that using statins to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduces cardiovascular events, and more intensive lowering of LDL-C further decreases the risk of occlusive vascular events. Lipoprotein studies suggest treating patients more aggressively when low-density lipoprotein particle (LDL-P) number is discordantly high in the presence of normal LDL-C levels. Failure to manage LDL-P numbers may lead to additional direct and indirect costs.

Objective: This analysis modeled direct and indirect costs associated with cardiovascular events due to suboptimal treatment resulting from discordance between LDL-C and LDL-P levels.

Methods: The analysis was conducted from the payer perspective and the employer perspective, respectively, over a 3-year time period. Clinical data were obtained from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, a community-based population study. The employer perspective included indirect costs and quality-adjusted life years in addition to the direct costs and cardiovascular disease events considered in the payer analysis. All costs are reported in 2011 dollars.

Results: From the payer perspective, managing LDL-C and LDL-P in comparison with LDL-C alone reduced costs ($21,212) and cardiovascular events (9 events). Similar patterns were observed for managing LDL-P alone in comparison with LDL-C. From the employer perspective, managing both LDL-P alone or in combination with LDL-C also resulted in lower costs, fewer cardiovascular disease events, and increased quality-adjusted life years in comparison with LDL-C.

Conclusion: This analysis indicates that the benefits of additional testing to optimally manage LDL-P levels outweigh the costs of more aggressive treatment. These favorable results depended on the cost of drug therapy.