Search

Objectives: Attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) therapeutic goals in statin-treated patients remains suboptimal. We quantified the health economic impact of delayed lipid-lowering intensification from an Australian healthcare and societal perspective., Methods: A lifetime Markov cohort model (n = 1000) estimating the impact on coronary heart disease (CHD) of intensifying lipid-lowering treatment in statin-treated patients with uncontrolled LDL-C, at moderate to high risk of CHD with no delay or after a 5-year delay, compared with standard of care (no intensification), starting at age 40 years. Intensification was tested with high-intensity statins or statins + ezetimibe. LDL-C levels were extracted from a primary care cohort. CHD risk was estimated using the pooled cohort equation. The effect of cumulative exposure to LDL-C on CHD risk was derived from Mendelian randomization data. Outcomes included CHD events, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), healthcare and productivity costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). All outcomes were discounted annually by 5%., Results: Over the lifetime horizon, compared with standard of care, achieving LDL-C control with no delay with high-intensity statins prevented 29 CHD events and yielded 30 extra QALYs (ICERs AU$13 205/QALY) versus 22 CHD events and 16 QALYs (ICER AU$20 270/QALY) with a 5-year delay. For statins + ezetimibe, no delay prevented 53 CHD events and gave 45 extra QALYs (ICER AU$37 271/QALY) versus 40 CHD events and 29 QALYs (ICER of AU$44 218/QALY) after a 5-year delay., Conclusions: Delaying attainment of LDL-C goals translates into lost therapeutic benefit and a waste of resources. Urgent policies are needed to improve LDL-C goal attainment in statin-treated patients., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Statins are widely prescribed for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), but their effectiveness is dependent on the level of adherence and persistence., Objectives: This study aimed to explore the patterns of switching, adherence and persistence among the Australian general population with newly dispensed statins., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a random sample of data from the Australian national prescription claims data. Switching, adherence to and persistence with statins were assessed for people starting statins from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2019. Switching was defined as either switching to another intensity of statin, to another statin or to a non-statin agent. Non-persistence to treatment was defined as discontinuation (i.e. ≥90 days with no statin) of coverage. Adherence was measured using proportion of days covered (PDC), and patients with PDC < 0.80 were considered non-adherent. Cox proportional hazard models were used to compare discontinuation, switching and reinitiation between different statins., Results: A cohort of 141,062 people dispensed statins and followed over a median duration of 2.5 years were included. Of the cohort, 29.3% switched statin intensity, 28.4% switched statin type, 3.7% switched to ezetimibe and in 2.7%, ezetimibe was added as combination therapy during the study period. Overall, 58.8% discontinued statins based on the 90-day gap criteria, of whom 55.2% restarted. The proportion of people non-adherent was 24.0% at 6 months to 49.0% at 5 years. People on low and moderate intensity statins were more likely to discontinue compared to those on high-intensity statins (hazard ratio [HR] 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.31), (HR 1.28, 95%CI 1.14-1.42), respectively. Compared to maintaining same statin type and intensity, switching statins, which includes up-titration (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.70 to 0.86) was associated with less likelihood of discontinuation after reinitiation., Conclusions: Long-term persistence and adherence to statins remains generally poor among Australians, which limits the effectiveness of these medicines and the consequent health impact they may provide for individuals (and by extension, the population impact when poor persistence and adherence is considered in the statin-taking population). Switching between statins is prevalent in one third of statin users, although any clinical benefit of the observed switching trend is unknown. This, combined with the high volume of statin prescriptions, highlights the need for better strategies to address poor persistence and adherence., (© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Little is known about the attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets in patients treated with statins in Australian primary healthcare setting that are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease. A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from electronic medical records of patients treated by general practitioners across Australia. LDL-C target attainment was defined as LDL-C levels ≤ 2 mmol/L for all risk groups, in line with Australian guidelines. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with LDL-C target attainment. Overall, 61,407 patients were included in the analysis. The mean age was 65 years (± standard deviation [SD] 12.1); 52.0% were males.. Overall, the median LDL-C level was 2.3 mmol/L (IQR = 1.8 - 2.8) and 36.0% of the study population met therapeutic targets. Increased likelihood to achieve LDL-C targets was observed in patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.92 - 2.24), stroke (OR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.39 - 1.79, P < 0.001) or chronic heart disease (OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.55 - 1.81, P < 0.001). Patients diagnosed with dyslipidemia (OR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.55 - 0.64, P < 0.001), hypertension (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 - 1.00, P < 0.05) and current smokers (OR = 0.71, 95% CI 0.71 - 1.00, P < 0.05), were less likely to attain LDL-C targets, regardless of the type, intensity and length of use of the prescribed statin. Longer duration and higher intensity statin were associated with more patients achieving targeted LDL-C goal, however nearly two thirds of Australians still failed to achieve targeted outcome even after 24 months of statin therapy., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The attainment of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) therapeutic goals in real-world settings among patients receiving combination lipid-lowering therapy (LLT, statins plus non-statins) is not well characterised., Objective: To evaluate LDL-C levels and LDL-C goal attainment in patients treated with combination LLT in real-world primary care settings., Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients treated with combination LLT. Data were drawn from general practitioner electronic medical records across Australia from 2013 to 2019. The on-treatment goal for LDL-C was < 2 mmol/L (77 mg/dL), as per Australian guidelines., Results: The cohort analysed included 9,173 individuals treated with combination LLT. The mean age was 65.8 years (standard deviation [SD] 11.5), 60.1% were males, and 56.7% had at least one cardiovascular risk factor. The median on-treatment LDL-C was 2.1 mmol/L (IQR 1.6-2.8), and overall 45.4% of the cohort met LDL-C goals, with individuals on fixed-dose combination of statins plus ezetimibe having the highest rates of achievement (49.8%). In multivariable logistic regression analyses, factors associated with LDL-C goal achievement were male sex (odds ratio [OR] 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-1.6, p < 0.001), aged >80 years (OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.5 - 6.6, p = 0.006), and a history of T2DM (OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.5-1.9, p < 0.001) or coronary heart disease (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2 - 1.6, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: More than half of Australians on combination LLT did not achieve LDL-C goals. Urgent measures are needed to address this gap in clinical practice to minimise negative health outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest CM, SVT, MP, ST, DA and ZA have nothing to declare; SL and DT are employed by Amgen Australia Pty Ltd or other Amgen subsidiaries; GS is employed by IQVIA; EZ declares grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Shire, outside the submitted work; DL declares grants from Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer and Sanofi, and past participation in advisory boards and/or receipt of honoraria from Abbvie, Amgen, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi and Shire, outside the submitted work., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Lipid-lowering medications comprise standard of care in the prevention of cardiovascular disease. This study examined the trends in the utilization of statin and non-statin medications in the Australian general population between 2013 and 2019. Pharmacoepidemiological analyses were performed using pharmacy dispensing data from Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. One-year prevalence and incidence of statin and non-statin prescribing patterns were reported, and relative variations in prescribing examined via Poisson regression modelling. The one-year prevalence of statins' prescriptions decreased between 2013-2019 by 5.5% (from 25.0%-19.5%). Females were less likely than males to be prescribed statins (rate ratio [RR]=0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.89-0.91). The one-year prevalence of ezetimibe alone, and in combination with statins, increased consistently from 2013-2019 from 1.5%-3.6% (P<0.01) and 0.1%-1.1% (P<0.01), respectively. The prevalence was higher among those aged 61-80 years (RR=1.20, 95%CI 1.10-1.21) and those aged older than 80 years (RR=1.34, 95%CI 1.22-1.47), when compared to people aged <60 years. The incidence of ezetimibe prescriptions was highest in people aged 61-80 years (RR=1.36, 95%CI 1.31-1.41) compared to those aged <60 years. The one-year prevalence of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor prescriptions was highest among those aged 46-60 years (RR=1.24, 95%CI 0.97-4.97) compared to people aged <46 and >60 years. Females were less likely than males to be prescribed a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor (RR=0.87, 95%CI 0.75-0.98). Statins remain the most prevalent lipid-lowering medication prescribed in Australia. The prescribing of non-statin medications remains low, but is increasing., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness, from the perspective of the Australian public healthcare system, of icosapent ethyl in combination with statin therapy compared with statin alone for the prevention of cardiovascular disease., Methods and Results: A Markov model populated with data from the Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial was designed to predict the effectiveness and costs of icosapent ethyl in combination with statins compared with statins alone over a 20-year time horizon. Data inputs for costs and utilities were sourced from published sources. The annual costs of icosapent ethyl were assumed to be AUD1637 (USD2907) per person. All future costs and outcomes were discounted annually by 5%. The main outcome of interest was incremental cost-effectiveness ratios in terms of cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained and per year of life saved (YoLS). Over a 20-year time horizon, compared with statin alone, icosapent ethyl in combination with statin was estimated to cost an additional AUD$13,022 per person, but led to 0.338 YoLS and 0.289 QALYs gained (all discounted). These equated to incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of AUD45,036 per QALY gained and AUD38,480 per YoLS. Sub-analyses for primary and secondary prevention were AUD96,136 and AUD35,935 per QALY gained, respectively. The results were sensitive to time-horizon, age related trends and the acquisition price of icosapent ethyl., Conclusion: Compared with statin alone, icosapent ethyl in combination with statin therapy is likely to be cost-effective in the prevention of cardiovascular disease assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of AUD50,000 per QALY gained, especially in the secondary preventive setting., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Using non-statin lipid-modifying agents in combination with statin therapy provides additional benefits for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction, but their value for money has only been evaluated in high-income countries (HICs). Furthermore, studies mainly derive effectiveness data from a single trial or older meta-analyses., Objectives: Our study used data from the most recent network meta-analysis (NMA) and local parameters to assess the cost effectiveness of non-statin agents in statin-treated patients with a history of CVD., Methods: A published Markov model was adopted to investigate lifetime outcomes: (1) number of recurrent CVD events prevented, (2) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained, (3) costs and (4) incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) and ezetimibe added to statin therapy. Event rates and effectiveness inputs were obtained from the NMA. Cost and utility data were gathered from published studies conducted in Thailand. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed., Results: Patients receiving PCSK9i and ezetimibe experienced fewer recurrent CVD events (number needed to treat [NNT] 17 and 30) and more QALYs (0.168 and 0.096 QALYs gained per person). However, under the societal perspective and at current acquisition costs in 2018, ICERs of both agents were $US1,223,995 and 27,361 per QALY gained, respectively. Based on threshold analyses, the costs need to be reduced by 97 and 85%, respectively, for PCSK9i and ezetimibe to be cost-effective., Conclusions: Despite the proven effectiveness of PCSK9i and ezetimibe, the costs of these agents need to reduce to a much greater extent than in HICs to be cost-effective in Thailand.

Background: Statins comprise a key strategy for the prevention and treatment of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease, but prescribing remains suboptimal., Objectives: The objective of this study was to characterize the predictors of statin use among adults aged ≥65 years., Methods: A cross-sectional study using Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) data on reimbursed prescriptions for a 10% random sample of the Australian population in 2016 was performed. Predictors of statin use were identified via multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were performed separately for people who were concessional beneficiaries (with a low, capped copayment) and other ("general") people., Results: Among 351,471 (concessional = 295,875 and general = 55,596) older adults, 44.2% were dispensed statins (concessional = 46.4% and general = 32.2%). Among the concessional beneficiaries, people aged 75 to 84 years were more likely to use statins (odds ratio [OR] 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.10), whereas those aged ≥85 years were less likely to use statins (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.69-0.72), compared with people aged 65 to 74 years. Men were more likely to use statins than women (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12-1.16). Diabetes was associated with over 2-fold (OR 2.48, 95% CI 2.43-2.53) increased likelihood of statin use. People with cardiovascular-related conditions including hypertension, angina, and congestive heart failure experienced increased likelihood of statin use as was being dispensed anticoagulant or antiplatelet medication. Having malignancy, psychotic illness, or pain were associated with lower likelihood of statin use. Similar predictors of statin use were noted for the general population., Conclusion: More than 40% of older adults in Australia used statins in 2016 with uptake dependent on individual-level factors such as demographics and comorbidities. Future research should examine the extent to which provider and/or health system-level factors contribute to the variable uptake of statin therapy., (Copyright © 2018 National Lipid Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to examine the level of and predictors of statin nonadherence and discontinuation among older adults., Methods: Among 22 340 Australians aged ≥65 years who initiated statin therapy from January 2014 to December 2015, we estimated the first-year nonadherence (proportion of days covered [PDC] <0.80) and discontinuation (≥90 days without statin coverage) rates. Predictors of nonadherence and discontinuation were examined via multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were performed separately for general beneficiaries (with a higher co-payment; n = 4841) and concessional beneficiaries (with a lower co-payment; n = 17 499)., Results: During the one-year follow-up, 55.1% were nonadherent (concessional 52.6%; general beneficiaries 64.2%) and 44.7% discontinued statins (concessional 43.1%; general beneficiaries 50.4%). Among concessional beneficiaries, those aged 75-84 years and ≥85 years were more likely to discontinue than people aged 65-74 years (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.19 and 1.38, 1.23-1.54, respectively). Diabetes was associated with an increased likelihood of nonadherence and discontinuation, while hypertension, angina and congestive heart failure were associated with a lower likelihood of nonadherence and discontinuation. Anxiety was associated with an increased likelihood of discontinuation, but polypharmacy (concurrent use of five or more drugs) was associated with a lower likelihood of nonadherence and discontinuation. Statin initiation by a general medical practitioner was associated with both increased likelihood of nonadherence and discontinuation. Similar predictors of nonadherence and discontinuation were identified for the general beneficiaries., Conclusions: Among older adults prescribed statins, first-year nonadherence and discontinuation are high. Specific population subgroups such as people aged ≥85 years, those with diabetes or anxiety may require additional attention to improve statin adherence., (© 2018 The British Pharmacological Society.)

Objective: To examine the patterns of statin use and determine the 3-year adherence and discontinuation rates among a cohort of Australians aged ≥65 years with dementia., Methods: The yearly prevalence and incidence of statin use were compared via Poisson regression modeling using 2007 as the reference year. People with dementia were identified according to dispensing of antidementia medications. A cohort of 589 new statin users was followed longitudinally. Adherence was estimated via the proportion of days covered (PDC). Discontinuation was defined as ≥90 days without statin coverage., Results: The annual prevalence of statin use among older Australians with dementia increased from 20.6% in 2007 to 31.7% in 2016 (aged-sex adjusted rate ratio: 1.51, 95% confidence interval: 1.35-1.69). Among the new users, the proportion adherent (PDC ≥ 0.80) decreased from 60.3% at 6 months to 31.0% at 3 years. During the 3-year follow-up, 58.7% discontinued their statin., Conclusions: Despite increased use of statins among older Australians with dementia, adherence is low and discontinuation is high, which may point to intentional cessation.

Background: Statins reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes. This study examined the prevalence of statin use and assessed long-term adherence and persistence among people aged ≥65 years with diabetes., Methods: Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme data covering a 10% random sample of the Australian population were analyzed. Among older adults with diabetes, the yearly prevalence of statin use was compared via Poisson regression modeling using 2006 as the reference year. A cohort of 7400 new statin users (mean age 72.9 years; 46.2% female) was followed longitudinally. Adherence was assessed via the proportion of days covered (PDC). Statin discontinuation was defined as the first ≥90 days without statin coverage., Results: The prevalence of statin use increased from 52.0% in 2006 to 71.2% in 2016 (age and sex-adjusted rate ratio 1.37; 95% confidence interval 1.33-1.41). No gender differences in statin use were observed, but the likelihood of being dispensed statin decreased with increasing age. Among the longitudinal cohort, the proportion adherent (PDC ≥0.80) decreased from 54.0% at 6 months to 37.0% at 9 years. Over a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, 66.8% discontinued, and the likelihood of stopping statin medication within the first year was 42.7%. No age or gender differences in statin discontinuation were evident., Conclusions: Statin use has increased among older adults with diabetes. However, adherence is low and discontinuation is high. Further investigations into the factors associated with non-adherence or discontinuation of statins are important so as to optimize statin use towards achieving the intended cardiovascular benefits among older people with diabetes., (© 2018 Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Background: Statins have become standard of care in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The objective of this study was to examine the trends in statin use among Australians aged ≥ 65 years for the period 2007-2016., Methods: Data from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme covering a 10% random sample of the Australian population were analysed. The 1-year prevalence and incidence of statin use were determined for each year, as were the percentage of statin dispensations according to statin type or intensity and the percentage of new users prescribed each statin type or intensity. To describe relative changes, age-sex adjusted rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined via Poisson regression modelling using 2007 as the reference year., Results: The 1-year prevalence of statin use increased consistently each year from 34.2% in 2007 to 44.1% in 2016 (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.28-1.31). The 1-year incidence was 68.5 per 1000 in 2007 and 59.0 per 1000 in 2016 (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.84-0.90). Women were 18% (age-adjusted rate ratio [aRR] 0.82, 95% CI 0.79-0.83) less likely than men to initiate statins across all years. The incidence of statin use was also highest among individuals aged 65-74 years, who were about 15% (sex-adjusted rate ratio [sRR] 1.15, 95% CI 1.13-1.16) and 45% (sRR 1.45, 95% CI 1.44-1.47) more likely to initiate statins than those aged 75-84 and ≥ 85 years, respectively. Atorvastatin was the most commonly dispensed statin across all years. The proportion of new users dispensed high-intensity statins increased year-on-year from 23.6% in 2007 to 30.5% in 2016 (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.21-1.31)., Conclusion: The proportion of older adults in Australia using statins has increased over the last decade, although the incidence has declined. Atorvastatin is the most commonly dispensed statin and the use of high intensity statin has increased.

Background: Older people (aged ≥ 65 years) have distinctive challenges with medication adherence. However, adherence and persistence patterns among older statin users have not been comprehensively reviewed., Methods: As part of a broader systematic review, we searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, CENTRAL, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database through December 2016 for English articles reporting adherence and/or persistence among older statin users. Data were analyzed via descriptive methods and meta-analysis using random-effect modeling., Results: Data from more than 3 million older statin users in 82 studies conducted in over 40 countries were analyzed. At 1-year follow-up, 59.7% (primary prevention 47.9%; secondary prevention 62.3%) of users were adherent (medication possession ratio [MPR] or proportion of days covered [PDC] ≥ 80%). For both primary and secondary prevention subjects, 1-year adherence was worse among individuals aged more than 75 years than those aged 65-75 years. At 3 and ≥10 years, 55.3% and 28.4% of users were adherent, respectively. The proportion of users persistent at 1-year was 76.7% (primary prevention 76.0%; secondary prevention 82.6%). Additionally, 68.1% and 61.2% of users were persistent at 2 and 4 years, respectively. Among new statin users, 48.2% were nonadherent and 23.9% discontinued within the first year. The proportion of statin users who were adherent based on self-report was 85.5%., Conclusions: There is poor short and long term adherence and persistence among older statin users. Strategies to improve adherence and reduce discontinuation are needed if the intended cardiovascular benefits of statin treatment are to be realized.

Background: Older individuals (aged ≥65 years) are commonly prescribed statins but may experience a range of barriers in adhering to therapy. The factors associated with poor statin adherence and/or discontinuation among this population have not been comprehensively reviewed., Methods: We conducted a systematic review to identify English articles published through December 12, 2016 that reported factors associated with nonadherence and/or discontinuation of statins among older persons. Data were pooled via random-effects meta-analysis techniques., Results: Forty-five articles reporting data from more than 1.8 million older statin users from 13 countries were included. The factors associated with increased statin nonadherence were black/non-white race (odds ratio [OR] 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.39-1.98), female gender (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.03-1.13), current smoker (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.21), higher copayments (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.25-1.52), new user (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.21-2.07), lower number of concurrent cardiovascular medications (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.06-1.09), primary prevention (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.40-1.59), having respiratory disorders (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.12-1.23) or depression (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06-1.16), and not having renal disease (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.14). The factors associated with increased statin discontinuation were lower income status (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.06-1.36), current smoker (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.23), higher copayment (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.53-1.70), higher number of medications (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.06), presence of dementia (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.36), cancer (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.11-1.33) or respiratory disorders (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.05-1.34), primary prevention (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.24-2.22), and not having hypertension (OR 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.20) or diabetes (OR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04-1.15)., Conclusion: Interventions that target potentially modifiable factors including financial and social barriers, patients' perceptions about disease risk as well as polypharmacy may improve statin use in the older population.

Background: Individuals with metabolic syndrome (MetS) are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), often requiring combination drug therapy for control of risk factors and subsequent risk reduction. This study aims to compare the long-term effectiveness and cost effectiveness of the polypill (a multi-component tablet), and its components (alone or in combination), in a MetS population., Methods and Results: A Markov state transition model, using individual subject data from the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle study, was constructed to simulate the effects of the treatment versus no treatment on CVD events, and costs over 10 years. In 1,991 individuals classified as MetS and free of existing diabetes mellitus or CVD, treatment with the polypill (or its components) was effective at reducing cardiovascular events [statin: 171, aspirin (actetylsalicylic acid): 201, antihypertensive: 186 per 1,000 individuals]. The more drug therapies employed the greater the reduction, with the polypill reducing up to 351 cardiovascular events per 10,000 individuals. Cost-effectiveness analyses were sensitive to drug treatment costs and effectiveness of treatment. At a cost of AUD$42 per person per annum, aspirin was considered cost saving. All other treatment strategies, including the polypill, were not cost effective., Conclusion: The polypill is likely to be effective in the reduction of cardiovascular events in a MetS population. It is, however, not cost effective. Nevertheless, in a high-risk population, among whom combination therapy is often prescribed, the polypill is likely to be more cost effective than antihypertensive therapy alone or dual therapy with a statin and antihypertensive combination.