Papantoniou Panagiotis, Maniadakis Nikolaos
Department of Public Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of West Attica, 196 Alexandras Avenue, 115 21 Athens, Greece.
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Aug 15;13(16):2011. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13162011.
: Obesity is a global health issue with profound humanistic and financial implications. Novel pharmacological treatments, such as tirzepatide and semaglutide, offer promising options for sustained weight management; however, their cost-effectiveness warrants assessment. This study investigates the short-term cost-effectiveness of tirzepatide compared to semaglutide in achieving weight loss targets over 72 weeks in Greece. : A short-term cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Greek third-party payer (EOPYY), comparing treatment costs and clinical outcomes for semaglutide and tirzepatide over a 72-week horizon. Clinical efficacy was assessed by the proportion of patients achieving weight loss targets of ≥10%, ≥15%, ≥20%, ≥25%, and ≥30%, using data from the SURMOUNT-5-a 72-week, phase 3b, head-to-head study among overweight adults or those with obesity without diabetes. Only direct medical costs were included, and no discount was employed due to the short time horizon. Price scenario, deterministic, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. : Over 72 weeks, the deterministic analysis found the total treatment cost was EUR 5645.70 for tirzepatide and EUR 3201.68 for semaglutide. These base-case results indicated the cost per responder for tirzepatide at higher weight loss targets (e.g., EUR 28,658 and EUR 46,401 at ≥30%) and lower costs for semaglutide at lower targets (e.g., EUR 1627 lower at ≥10%). However, probabilistic sensitivity analysis revealed overlapping 95% confidence intervals at all thresholds, indicating no statistically significant difference in the cost of control between the treatments. : Semaglutide showed a numerically lower cost of control at lower weight loss targets, while tirzepatide was favoured at higher targets; however, these differences were not statistically significant.
肥胖是一个具有深远人文和经济影响的全球性健康问题。新型药物治疗，如替尔泊肽和司美格鲁肽，为持续体重管理提供了有前景的选择；然而，它们的成本效益值得评估。本研究调查了在希腊，替尔泊肽与司美格鲁肽相比，在72周内实现减肥目标的短期成本效益。：从希腊第三方支付机构（EOPYY）的角度进行了短期成本效益分析，比较了司美格鲁肽和替尔泊肽在72周内的治疗成本和临床结果。使用SURMOUNT - 5（一项针对超重成年人或无糖尿病肥胖者的72周3b期头对头研究）的数据，通过达到体重减轻目标≥10%、≥15%、≥20%、≥25%和≥30%的患者比例来评估临床疗效。仅纳入直接医疗成本，由于时间跨度短未采用贴现。进行了价格情景、确定性和概率敏感性分析。：在72周内，确定性分析发现替尔泊肽的总治疗成本为5645.70欧元，司美格鲁肽为3201.68欧元。这些基础案例结果表明，在较高减肥目标下替尔泊肽的每位应答者成本（例如，≥30%时为28,658欧元和46,401欧元），而在较低目标下司美格鲁肽成本较低（例如，≥10%时低1627欧元）。然而，概率敏感性分析显示在所有阈值下95%置信区间重叠，表明两种治疗在控制成本上无统计学显著差异。：司美格鲁肽在较低减肥目标下显示出数值上较低的控制成本，而替尔泊肽在较高目标下更受青睐；然而，这些差异无统计学意义。
