Medical Decision and Economic Group, Department of Pharmacy, Ren Ji Hospital, South Campus, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Department of Endocrinology, Ren Ji Hospital, South Campus, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, China.
Clin Ther. 2019 Mar;41(3):445-455.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Feb 1.
The goal of this study was to investigate the long-term economic outcomes of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine use in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) whose oral antidiabetic drugs did not provide sufficient glycemic control.
A published and validated Chinese diabetes health policy model, which reflects Chinese T2DM epidemiologic profiles, was used to assess the lifetime economic outcomes of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality. Efficacy and safety, medical expenditure, and utility data were derived from the literature, which were assigned to model variables for estimating the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs, as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of Chinese health care service providers. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
Compared with insulin glargine, insulin degludec was associated with 0.0053 QALY at an additional cost of $3278 in our simulated cohort. This outcome resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of insulin degludec over insulin glargine of $613,443 per QALY gained. The one-way sensitivity analyses indicated that the results were sensitive to several model inputs.
Insulin degludec is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with insulin glargine for Chinese patients with T2DM whose disease is inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs.
本研究旨在调查对于口服降糖药物血糖控制不佳的中国 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)患者,相比甘精胰岛素,德谷胰岛素的长期经济学结局。
本研究使用已发表且经过验证的中国糖尿病卫生政策模型,该模型反映了中国 T2DM 的流行病学特征,用于评估微血管和大血管并发症及死亡率的终生经济学结局。疗效和安全性、医疗支出以及效用数据源自文献,将这些数据分配到模型变量中,以估算质量调整生命年(QALY)和成本,以及增量成本效益比。分析从中国医疗保健服务提供者的角度进行。进行了单因素敏感性分析和概率敏感性分析。
与甘精胰岛素相比,在我们模拟的队列中,德谷胰岛素增加了 0.0053 个 QALY,额外成本为 3278 美元。这导致德谷胰岛素相对于甘精胰岛素的增量成本效益比为每获得一个 QALY 需额外花费 613443 美元。单因素敏感性分析表明,结果对多个模型输入敏感。
与甘精胰岛素相比,对于口服降糖药物血糖控制不佳的中国 T2DM 患者,德谷胰岛素不太可能具有成本效益。