This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction  • Coagulation Disorders  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Jneid and colleagues¹ have comprehensively reviewed the clinical benefits of adding clopidogrel to aspirin therapy for patients with acute non–ST-segment elevation coronary syndromes. However, their approach was flawed in terms of focusing on relative risk reductions, a ploy commonly used by the pharmaceutical industry to promote the efficacy of their products in a misleading manner.

Given that health resources are finite, it is almost irresponsible to publish a review of the efficacy of any form of drug therapy without any discussion of the relative cost-effectiveness of the individual agents. Minimally important clinical differences can only be understood in the context of the cost paid for the benefit derived.² In this particular case, the authors should have addressed the issue of whether it is cost-effective to routinely add clopidogrel to aspirin therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes. This, of course, is where the pharmaceutical industry, with their array of newer . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Gregory M. Peterson, PhD, MBA; Shane L. Jackson, BPharm(Hons)
Hobart, Australia

RELATED ARTICLE

Cost-effectiveness of Newer Antiplatelet Drugs—Reply
Deepak Bhatt, Hani Jneid, Roberto Corti, Juan Badimon, Valentin Fuster, and Gary Francis
Arch Intern Med. 2003;163(20):2534.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT