A Discrete Event Simulation Model to Assess the Economic Value of a Hypothetical Pharmacogenomics Test for Statin-Induced Myopathy in Patients Initiating a Statin in Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Statin (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor) therapy is the mainstay dyslipidemia treatment and reduces the risk of a cardiovascular (CV) event (CVE) by up to 35%. However, adherence to statin therapy is poor. One reason patients discontinue statin therapy is musculoskeletal pain and the associated risk of rhabdomyolysis. Research is ongoing to develop a pharmacogenomics (PGx) test for statin-induced myopathy as an alternative to the current diagnosis method, which relies on creatine kinase levels. The potential economic value of a PGx test for statin-induced myopathy is unknown. METHODS: We developed a lifetime discrete event simulation (DES) model for patients 65 years of age initiating a statin after a first CVE consisting of either an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or a stroke. The model evaluates the potential economic value of a hypothetical PGx test for diagnosing statin-induced myopathy. We have assessed the model over the spectrum of test sensitivity and specificity parameters. RESULTS: Our model showed that a strategy with a perfect PGx test had an incremental cost-utility ratio of 4273 Canadian dollars ($Can) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that when the payer willingness-to-pay per QALY reaches $Can12,000, the PGx strategy is favored in 90% of the model simulations. CONCLUSION: We found that a strategy favoring patients staying on statin therapy is cost effective even if patients maintained on statin are at risk of rhabdomyolysis. Our results are explained by the fact that statins are highly effective in reducing the CV risk in patients at high CV risk, and this benefit largely outweighs the risk of rhabdomyolysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".