The CNIC-polypill (acetylsalicylic acid, atorvastatin, and ramipril), an effective and cost-saving secondary prevention strategy compared with other therapeutic options in patients with ischaemic heart disease

Identifier:  imarina:9379267

Handle: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11797/imarina9379267

Authors:  Dalmau R; Cordero A; Masana L; Ruiz E; Sicras-Mainar A; González-Juanatey JR

Abstract:
Aims The retrospective NEPTUNO study evaluated the effectiveness of the Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares (CNIC)-polypill (including acetylsalicylic acid, ramipril, and atorvastatin) vs. other therapeutic approaches in secondary prevention for cardiovascular (CV) disease. In this substudy, the focus was on the subgroup of patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Methods Patients on four strategies: CNIC-polypill, its monocomponents as loose medications, equipotent medications, and other ther- and results apies. The primary endpoint was the incidence of recurrent major adverse CV events (MACEs) after 2 years. After matching, 1080 patients were included in each cohort. The CNIC-polypill cohort had a significantly lower incidence of recurrent MACE compared with monocomponents, equipotent drugs, and other therapies cohorts (16.1 vs. 24, 24.4, and 24.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). The hazard ratios (HRs) for recurrent MACE were higher in monocomponents (HR = 1.12; P = 0.042), equipotent drugs (HR = 1.14; P = 0.031), and other therapies cohorts (HR = 1.17; P = 0.016) compared with the CNIC-polypill, with a number needed to treat of 12 patients to prevent a MACE. The CNIC-polypill demonstrated a greater reduction in LDL cholesterol (LDL-c; −56.1 vs. −43.6, −33.3, and −33.2% in the monocomponents, equipotent drugs, and other therapies, respectively; P < 0.001) and systolic blood pressure (−13.7 vs. −11.5, −10.6, and −9.1% in the CNIC-polypill, monocomponents, equipotent drugs, and other therapies, respectively; P < 0.001) compared with other cohorts. The CNIC-polypill intervention was less costly and more effective than any other therapeutic option, with €2317–€2407 cost savings per event prevented. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conclusion In IHD, the CNIC-polypill exemplifies a guideline-recommended secondary prevention treatment linked to better outcomes and cost saving compared with other therapeutic options.