Chaugule Shraddha, Graham Claudia
a Dexcom, Inc. , San Diego , CA , USA.
J Med Econ. 2017 Nov;20(11):1128-1135. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2017.1360312. Epub 2017 Aug 11.
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) compared to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) alone in people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) using multiple daily injections (MDI) from the Canadian societal perspective.
The IMS CORE Diabetes Model (v.9.0) was used to assess the long-term (50 years) cost-effectiveness of real-time CGM (G5 Mobile CGM System; Dexcom, Inc., San Diego, CA) compared with SMBG alone for a cohort of adults with poorly-controlled T1DM. Treatment effects and baseline characteristics of patients were derived from the DIAMOND randomized controlled clinical trial; all other assumptions and costs were sourced from published research. The accuracy and clinical effectiveness of G5 Mobile CGM is the same as the G4 Platinum CGM used in the DIAMOND randomized clinical trial. Base case assumptions included (a) baseline HbA1c of 8.6%, (b) change in HbA1c of -1.0% for CGM users vs -0.4% for SMBG users, and (c) disutilities of -0.0142 for non-severe hypoglycemic events (NSHEs) and severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) not requiring medical intervention, and -0.047 for SHEs requiring medical resources. Treatment costs and outcomes were discounted at 1.5% per year.
The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the base case G5 Mobile CGM vs SMBG was $33,789 CAD/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Sensitivity analyses showed that base case results were most sensitive to changes in percentage reduction in hypoglycemic events and disutilities associated with hypoglycemic events. The base case results were minimally impacted by changes in baseline HbA1c level, incorporation of indirect costs, changes in the discount rate, and baseline utility of patients.
The results of this analysis demonstrate that G5 Mobile CGM is cost-effective within the population of adults with T1DM using MDI, assuming a Canadian willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 CAD per QALY.
从加拿大社会视角评估1型糖尿病(T1DM)患者使用多次皮下注射(MDI)时,实时动态血糖监测(CGM)相较于单纯自我血糖监测(SMBG)的成本效益。
使用IMS CORE糖尿病模型(v.9.0)评估实时CGM(G5移动CGM系统;德康公司,加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥)与单纯SMBG相比,对一组血糖控制不佳的成年T1DM患者的长期(50年)成本效益。患者的治疗效果和基线特征来自DIAMOND随机对照临床试验;所有其他假设和成本均来自已发表的研究。G5移动CGM的准确性和临床有效性与DIAMOND随机临床试验中使用的G4铂金CGM相同。基础病例假设包括:(a)基线糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)为8.6%;(b)CGM使用者的HbA1c变化为-1.0%,而SMBG使用者为-0.4%;(c)非严重低血糖事件(NSHEs)和无需医疗干预的严重低血糖事件(SHEs)的失能调整权重为-0.0142,需要医疗资源的SHEs的失能调整权重为-0.047。治疗成本和结果按每年1.5%的贴现率进行贴现。
基础病例中G5移动CGM与SMBG相比的增量成本效益比为33,789加元/质量调整生命年(QALY)。敏感性分析表明,基础病例结果对低血糖事件减少百分比和与低血糖事件相关的失能调整权重的变化最为敏感。基础病例结果受基线HbA1c水平变化、间接成本纳入、贴现率变化和患者基线效用的影响最小。
该分析结果表明,假设加拿大每QALY支付意愿阈值为50,000加元,G5移动CGM在使用MDI的成年T1DM患者群体中具有成本效益。