Long-acting insulin analogues for type 1 diabetes: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The comparison between long acting insulin analogues (LAIA) and human insulin (NPH) has been investigated for decades, with many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews giving mixed results. This overlapping and contradictory evidence has increased uncertainty on coverage decisions at health systems level. AIM: To conduct an overview of systematic reviews and update existing reviews, preparing new meta-analysis to determine whether LAIA are effective for T1D patients compared to NPH. METHODS: We identified systematic reviews of RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of LAIA glargine or detemir, compared to NPH insulin for T1D, assessing glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and hypoglycemia. Data sources included Pubmed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and hand-searching. The methodological quality of studies was independently assessed by two reviewers, using AMSTAR and Jadad scale. We found 11 eligible systematic reviews that contained a total of 25 relevant clinical trials. Two reviewers independently abstracted data. RESULTS: We found evidence that LAIA are efficacious compared to NPH, with estimates showing a reduction in nocturnal hypoglycemia episodes (RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.57; 0.76) and A1C (95% CI 0.23; 0.12). No significance was found related to severe hypoglycemia (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.71; 1.24). CONCLUSION: This study design has allowed us to carry out the most comprehensive assessment of RCTs on this subject, filling a gap in diabetes research. Our paper addresses a question that is important not only for decision makers but also for clinicians.

Budget Impact of Long-Acting Insulin Analogues: The Case in Brazil.

BACKGROUND: Long-acting insulin analogues for type 1 diabetes (T1D) treatment have been available on the Brazilian market since 2002. However, the population cannot access the analogues through the public health system. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental budget impact of long-acting insulin analogues coverage for T1D patients in the Brazilian public health system compared to NPH insulin. METHODS: We performed a budget impact analysis of a five-year period. The eligible population was projected using epidemiological data from the International Diabetes Federation estimates for patients between 0-14 and 20-79 years old. The prevalence of T1D was estimated in children, and the same proportion was applied to the 15-19-year-old group due to a gap in epidemiological information. We considered 4,944 new cases per year and a 34.61/100,000 inhabitants mortality rate. Market share for long-acting insulin analogues was assumed as 20% in the first year, reaching 40% in the fifth year. The mean daily dose was taken from clinical trials. We calculated the bargaining power of the Ministry of Health by dividing the price paid for human insulin in the last purchase by the average regulated price. We performed univariate and multivariate sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The incremental budget impact of long-acting insulin analogues was US$ 28.6 million in the first year, and reached US$ 58.7 million in the fifth year. The total incremental budget impact was US$ 217.9 million over the five-year period. The sensitivity analysis showed that the percentage of T1D among diabetic adults and the insulin analogue price were the main factors that affected the budget impact. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of the first year of long-acting insulin analogue coverage would correspond to 0.03% of total public health expenditure. The main advantage of this study is that it identifies potential bargaining power because it features more realistic profiles of resource usage, once centralized purchasing is established as an economically sustainable strategy. Clinical guidelines restricting the use of insulin analogues would make the decision towards insulin analogue coverage more affordable.