Search

Objectives: Dyslipidemia, a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), is marked by abnormal lipid levels, such as the elevated lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). Statins are the first-line treatment for LDL-C reduction. Pitavastatin (PIT) has shown potential in lowering LDL-C and improving high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). This review assesses pitavastatin's efficacy, effectiveness, and safety in dyslipidemia management in Asia. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases up to November 2024, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Seventeen studies (12 RCTs and 5 non-RCTs) were analyzed, focusing on LDL-C reduction, safety profiles, and adverse events. The quality of the studies was assessed using checklists to ensure the selection of the best studies and to limit bias. Results: Pitavastatin doses (1–4 mg) reduced LDL-C by 28–47%, comparable to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin. The 2 mg dose matched atorvastatin's 10 mg dose in efficacy for both short-term (35–42%) and long-term (28–36%) use. LDL-C target achievement rates were 75–95%. Adverse events, including mild myalgia and elevated liver enzymes, were rare, and discontinuation rates were low. Conclusions: Pitavastatin is an effective and safe alternative to traditional statins for dyslipidemia management in Asia. Further research on long-term outcomes and high-risk groups is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Pneumococcal disease (PD), caused by S. pneumoniae, is a serious global health issue, primarily for adults over 65, due to its high mortality and morbidity rates. Recently, broader-serotype vaccines have been introduced to cope with tremendous hospital costs and decreasing quality of life. Our study aims to systematically review the cost-effectiveness of current PCVs (pneumococcal conjugate vaccines) and PPVs (pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine) from 2018 to April 2024. Methods: Articles were identified through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Key outcomes include an improved incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), with the article's quality assessed via the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022). In total, 23 studies were included, with 22 studies of high quality and 1 of moderate quality. Results: These articles showed that PCV20 was the most cost-effective option compared with other vaccines, including PPV23, PCV13, PCV15, and PCV15/PPV23, for both young and older adults, regardless of risk factors. PCV20, when used alone, saved greater costs than PCV20, followed by PPV23. Conclusions: For countries applying lower-valency vaccines, switching to PCV20 as a single regimen would be the most beneficial for averting pneumococcal cases and reducing costs in adults aged 18–64 and over 65. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Pneumococcal disease, caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, is the leading cause of mortality in children worldwide. The tremendous direct cost of hospital admissions and significant indirect costs from productivity loss contribute considerably to its economic burden, with vaccination being the only efficient protection against the illness. Our study aims to summarize the cost-effectiveness of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) implemented in the pediatric population. Methods: Employing the online databases PubMed, Embase, and Medline, we looked for economic evaluations from 2018 until March 2024. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICER) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) were the primary outcomes for measuring the cost-effectiveness of PCVs. A 28-item CHEERS 2022 checklist was applied to assess the quality of the collected studies. Results: Of the 16 papers found, 9/16 discussed the lower-valent vaccines (PCV13, PCV10) and 7/16 examined the higher-valent vaccines (PCV20, PCV15). PCV13 and PCV10 involved greater costs and generated more QALY compared to no vaccination. Both PCV15 and PCV20 averted substantial healthcare costs and yielded greater quality of life than PCV13. Additionally, PCV20 was a dominant strategy compared to PCV15. Conclusions: Utilizing PCV13 is a very cost-effective option compared to not getting vaccinated. Transitioning from PCV13 to PCV20 would result in higher QALY gain and more cost-saving than switching to PCV15. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]