2008 JASN IMPACT FACTOR 7.505	HOME   AUTHOR INFO   EDITORIAL BOARD   SUBSCRIBE   FEEDBACK   ALERTS   HELP
advanced	CURRENT ISSUE	ARCHIVES	JASN Express	ONLINE SUBMISSION

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ravera, M. Articles by Vettoretti, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ravera, M. Articles by Vettoretti, S.

Economic Evaluation of Angiotensin Receptor Blockers in Type 2 Diabetes, Hypertension, and Nephropathy

Division of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Department of Cardio-Nephrology, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria San Martino Genoa, Genoa, Italy

Address correspondence to: Dr. Maura Ravera, Division of Nephrology, Dialysis and Transplantation, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Genoa, Viale Benedetto XV 6, 16123 Genoa, Italy. Phone: +39-10-353-8959; Fax: +39-10-353-8959; E-mail: mauraravera{at}unige.it

There is a rising incidence and prevalence of ESRD as a result of diabetes, with poor outcome and growing costs. Recently, two large trials, the Irbesartan Diabetic Nephropathy Trial (IDNT) and Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL), showed that angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are more effective than traditional antihypertensive therapies at reducing progression toward ESRD in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes and overt nephropathy, regardless of changes in BP. The results of these two trials were used to compare the costs of ARB with those of renal replacement therapy (dialysis and renal transplantation) in an effort to establish whether ARB are cost-saving because they delay ESRD. Two different pharmacoeconomic approaches were used. With regard to the RENAAL trial, the number of ESRD days on losartan therapy as compared with the number of ESRD days on standard antihypertensive therapy was calculated, and the difference between the two was combined with the costs of ESRD. In the IDNT trial, Markov models were applied to assess the economic impact of irbesartan and to extrapolate future clinical and cost outcomes. Several economic analyses were performed in the United States and in European countries. Applying pharmacoeconomic models showed that treatment with ARB was associated with a greater improvement in life expectancy and lower total costs compared with amlodipine and standard antihypertensive therapy. Therefore, treating patients with type 2 diabetes, nephropathy, and hypertension with ARB is life- and cost-saving compared with traditional antihypertensive therapy.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Greenstein, M. Tavakoli, M. Mojaddidi, A. Al-Sunni, G. Matfin, and R. A Malik Review: Microvascular complications: evaluation and monitoring relevance to clinical practice, clinical trials, and drug development The British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease, July 1, 2007; 7(4): 166 - 171. [Abstract] [PDF]

Copyright © 2009 by the American Society of Nephrology. Online ISSN: 1533-3450 Print ISSN: 1046-6673