Hubert Department of Global Health, Emory Rollins School of Public Health, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Department of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
Diabet Med. 2024 May;41(5):e15303. doi: 10.1111/dme.15303. Epub 2024 Mar 12.
This analysis assessed the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) in insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).
Costs and outcomes for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 from a US healthcare payer perspective were assessed using the BRAVO diabetes model. Baseline clinical data were derived from EDITION-3, a 12-month randomized controlled trial comparing Gla-300 with Gla-100 in insulin-naïve adults with inadequately controlled T2D on OADs. Treatment costs were calculated based on doses observed in EDITION-3 and 2020 US net prices, while costs for complications were based on published literature. Lifetime costs ($US) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted and used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) estimates; extensive scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted.
Lifetime medical costs were estimated to be $353,441 and $352,858 for individuals receiving Gla-300 and Gla-100 respectively; insulin costs were $52,613 and $50,818. Gla-300 was associated with a gain of 8.97 QALYs and 21.12 life-years, while Gla-100 was associated with a gain of 8.89 QALYs and 21.07 life-years. This resulted in an ICER of $7522/QALY gained for Gla-300 versus Gla-100. Thus, Gla-300 was cost-effective versus Gla-100 based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY. Compared with Gla-100, Gla-300 provided a net monetary benefit of $3290. Scenario and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the base case.
Gla-300 may be a cost-effective treatment option versus Gla-100 over a lifetime horizon for insulin-naïve people in the United States with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs.
本分析评估了胰岛素甘精 300 单位/毫升(Gla-300)与胰岛素甘精 100 单位/毫升(Gla-100)在口服抗糖尿病药物(OAD)控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病(T2D)胰岛素初治成人中的成本效益。
从美国医疗保健支付者的角度,使用 BRAVO 糖尿病模型评估 Gla-300 与 Gla-100 的成本和结果。基线临床数据来自 EDITION-3,这是一项比较 Gla-300 与 Gla-100 的 12 个月随机对照试验,在 OAD 控制不佳的 T2D 胰岛素初治成人中进行。治疗费用根据 EDITION-3 中的观察剂量和 2020 年美国净价格计算,而并发症费用则基于已发表的文献。预测了终生成本($US)和质量调整生命年(QALYs),并用于计算增量成本效益比(ICER)估计值;进行了广泛的情景和敏感性分析。
预计接受 Gla-300 和 Gla-100 的个体的终生医疗费用分别为 353441 美元和 352858 美元;胰岛素费用分别为 52613 美元和 50818 美元。Gla-300 与 8.97 QALYs 和 21.12 个生命年的增加相关,而 Gla-100 与 8.89 QALYs 和 21.07 个生命年的增加相关。这导致 Gla-300 相对于 Gla-100 的 ICER 为 7522 美元/QALY。因此,基于 50000 美元/QALY 的支付意愿阈值,Gla-300 相对于 Gla-100 具有成本效益。与 Gla-100 相比,Gla-300 提供了 3290 美元的净货币收益。情景和敏感性分析证实了基础案例的稳健性。
对于美国 OAD 控制不佳的 T2D 胰岛素初治人群,Gla-300 可能是一种具有成本效益的治疗选择,优于 Gla-100。