Suppr超能文献

一款即用型的液体胰高血糖素可用于治疗严重低血糖症,在预算影响模型中可降低医疗支付方的成本。

A ready-to-use liquid glucagon for treatment of severe hypoglycemia demonstrates reduced healthcare payer costs in a budget impact model.

机构信息

Avalere Health, LLC, Washington, DC, USA.

Xeris Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA.

出版信息

J Med Econ. 2020 Jul;23(7):744-750. doi: 10.1080/13696998.2020.1742131. Epub 2020 May 4.

Abstract

To model the annual value of a novel ready-to-use, room-temperature stable liquid glucagon rescue pen and prefilled syringe (GRP, G-PFS; Xeris Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) for treatment of severe hypoglycemia events (SHE) versus current lyophilized powder glucagon emergency kits (GEK). GRP is a prefilled auto-injector designed to promptly administer concentrated liquid glucagon in a simple two-step process. G-PFS is a stable liquid formulation of glucagon in a prefilled syringe. In simulated emergencies, GRP and G-PFS demonstrated high functional efficacy, where 99% of users successfully administered a full-dose of drug. Studies with currently available injectable GEK suggest very low success rates (6-31%). The high functional efficacy of GRP and G-PFS significantly reduces user errors and may reduce utilization across emergency medical services (EMS), emergency departments (ED), and inpatient and outpatient costs for SHE. To estimate the economic impact of GRP and G-PFS, we developed a one-year budget impact model from a US commercial health plan perspective. Cost offsets from successful glucagon administration incorporated EMS, ED, inpatient, and outpatient utilization. Diabetes prevalence and event probabilities were estimated from publicly-available sources and clinical expert opinion. Costs (US$) were obtained from the 2018 Medicare Fee Schedules and adjusted to represent commercial payer costs. GRP and G-PFS led to fewer EMS, ED, inpatient, and outpatient costs compared to GEK and no kit, resulting in total per-patient SHE costs of $2,564, $3,606, and $3,849, respectively. Costs for 1 million covered lives were 8.2 million following the introduction of GRP and G-PFS compared to almost 9 million before GRP and G-PFS. The model is limited by reliance on assumptions based on expert opinion for key variables, primarily the probability of: (1) ambulance calls, (2) ambulance transport to the ED, and (3) non-ambulance transport to the ED. A budget impact model suggests GRP and G-PFS can lead to significant annual cost savings for US commercial payers.

摘要

建立一种新的即用型、室温稳定的液体胰高血糖素急救笔和预充式注射器(GRP,G-PFS;Xeris Pharmaceuticals,Inc.)的年度价值模型,用于治疗严重低血糖事件(SHE),并与当前的冻干粉胰高血糖素急救包(GEK)进行比较。GRP 是一种预填充的自动注射器,旨在通过简单的两步过程迅速给予浓缩的液体胰高血糖素。G-PFS 是一种预填充的胰高血糖素稳定液体配方。在模拟的紧急情况下,GRP 和 G-PFS 表现出了很高的功能疗效,其中 99%的使用者成功给予了全剂量的药物。目前可用的注射型 GEK 研究表明成功率非常低(6-31%)。GRP 和 G-PFS 的高功能疗效显著降低了用户错误,可能会降低紧急医疗服务(EMS)、急诊部(ED)以及 SHE 的住院和门诊费用的利用率。为了估计 GRP 和 G-PFS 的经济影响,我们从美国商业健康计划的角度开发了为期一年的预算影响模型。成功给予胰高血糖素的成本抵消了 EMS、ED、住院和门诊的利用。糖尿病患病率和事件概率是根据公开来源和临床专家意见估计的。成本(美元)取自 2018 年医疗保险费用表,并进行了调整以代表商业支付方的成本。与 GEK 和无试剂盒相比,GRP 和 G-PFS 导致 EMS、ED、住院和门诊的成本更低,导致每位患者 SHE 的总成本分别为 2564 美元、3606 美元和 3849 美元。在引入 GRP 和 G-PFS 后,覆盖 100 万患者的费用为 820 万美元,而在引入 GRP 和 G-PFS 之前,这一数字几乎为 900 万美元。该模型的局限性在于依赖于专家意见的假设,这些假设主要是针对以下关键变量的概率:(1)救护车呼叫,(2)救护车送往 ED,以及(3)非救护车送往 ED。预算影响模型表明,GRP 和 G-PFS 可以为美国商业支付方带来显著的年度成本节约。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验