Lower risks of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma with GLP-1RAs in type 2 diabetes: A nationwide cohort study using target trial emulation framework.

BACKGROUND: To assess the association of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) versus long-acting insulins (LAIs), which are the two commonly prescribed injectable glucose-lowering agents (GLAs) for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after the failure of multiple oral GLAs. METHODS: We emulated a target trial using the nationwide data of a Taiwanese cohort with T2D. Incident new users of GLP-1RAs and LAIs during 2013-2018 were identified, and propensity score (PS) matching was applied to ensure between-group comparability in baseline patient characteristics. The primary outcome was the composite liver disease including cirrhosis or HCC. Each patient was followed until the occurrence of a study outcome, death, or the end of 2019, whichever came first. Subdistribution hazard models were employed to assess the treatment-outcome association. Sensitivity (e.g., stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis, time-dependent analysis), E-value, and negative control outcome analyses were performed to examine the robustness of study findings. RESULTS: We included 7171 PS-matched pairs of GLP-1RA and LAI users with no significant between-group differences at baseline. Compared with LAIs, the use of GLP-1RAs was associated with significantly reduced risks of composite liver disease (subdistribution hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.56 [0.42-0.76]), cirrhosis (0.59 [0.43-0.81]), and HCC (0.47 [0.24-0.93]). Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses and among patients with different baseline characteristics. CONCLUSION: Among T2D patients who require injectable GLAs, the use of GLP-1RAs versus LAIs was associated with lower risks of cirrhosis and HCC.

Chronic kidney outcomes associated with GLP-1 receptor agonists versus long-acting insulins among type 2 diabetes patients requiring intensive glycemic control: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) versus long-acting insulins (LAIs) on preventing progressive chronic kidney outcomes is uncertain for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients requiring intensive glycemic control. This study aimed to evaluate comparative effectiveness of GLP-1RA versus LAI therapies on progressive chronic kidney outcomes among patients having poor glycemic control and requiring these injectable glucose-lowering agents (GLAs). METHODS: 7279 propensity-score-matched pairs of newly stable GLP-1RA and LAI users in 2013-2018 were identified from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database and followed until death or 12/31/2019 (intention-to-treat). Subdistributional hazard model was utilized to assess the comparative effectiveness on a composite renal outcome (i.e., renal insufficiency [eGFR < 15 mL/min/1.73 m2], dialysis-dependent end-stage renal disease [ESRD], or renal death) and its individual components. Sensitivity analyses with the as-treated scenario, PS weighting, high-dimensional PS techniques, using cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) as positive control outcomes, and interaction testing were performed. RESULTS: In primary analyses, subdistribution hazard ratios (95% CIs) for initiating GLP-1RAs versus LAIs for the composite renal outcome, renal insufficiency, dialysis-dependent ESRD, and renal death were 0.39 (0.30-0.51), 0.43 (0.32-0.57), 0.29 (0.20-0.43), and 0.28 (0.15-0.51), respectively. Sensitivity analysis results were consistent with the primary findings. CVD history and the medication possession ratio of prior oral GLAs possessed modification effects on GLP-1RA-associated kidney outcomes. CONCLUSION: Using GLP-1RAs versus LAIs was associated with kidney benefits in T2D patients requiring intensive glycemic control and potentially at high risk of kidney progression. GLP-1RAs should be prioritized to patients with CVDs or adherence to prior oral GLAs to maximize kidney benefits.

Cost-effectiveness of carotid artery stenting vs endarterectomy: A simulation.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials conducted before the introduction of modern medical management to prevent stroke demonstrated that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) prevent stroke following transient ischemic attack (TIA). We compared the cost-effectiveness of CEA, CAS, and modern medical management in two secular settings of medical management in individuals with incident TIA and type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Using simulation modeling, our base-case analyses were performed from the healthcare sector perspective over a 20-year time horizon with an annual 3% discount rate applied to both costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Outcomes depended on age, sex, biomarkers associated with cardiovascular risk, and treatment effects based on a validated model of type 2 diabetes. Our simulation population was drawn from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2014 cohort. Costs for modern medical management were based on average wholesale prices, and revascularization costs were derived from published literature. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Compared to all other strategies, historical medical management plus CEA was either cost-saving or cost-effective at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY gained. Modern medical management was cost-effective compared to historical medical management without revascularization at a $100,000 acceptability threshold. However, both revascularization approaches (plus medical management) were cost-saving compared to modern medical management alone. CONCLUSION: Among individuals requiring carotid revascularization, carotid endarterectomy is the cost-effective strategy to treat individuals with type 2 diabetes following a TIA. For individuals for whom revascularization is contraindicated, modern medical therapy is cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors among patients with type 2 diabetes with and without established cardiovascular diseases: A model-based simulation analysis using 10-year real-world data and targeted literature review.

AIM: We conducted a model-based economic analysis of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), with and without established cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), using 10-year real-world data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A Markov model was utilized to estimate healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a 10-year simulation time horizon from a healthcare sector perspective, with both costs and QALYs discounted at 3% annually. Model inputs were derived from analyses of Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database or published studies of Taiwanese populations. The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Incorporated with our study findings, a targeted literature review was conducted to synthesize updated evidence on the cost-effectiveness of SGLT2is versus DPP4is. RESULTS: Over 10 years, use of SGLT2is versus DPP4is yielded ICERs of $3244 and $4186 per QALY gained for patients with T2D, with and without established CVDs, respectively. Results were robust across a series of sensitivity and scenario analyses, showing ICERs between $-1074 (cost-saving) and $8467 per QALY gained for patients with T2D with established CVDs and between $369 and $37 122 per QALY gained for patients with T2D without established CVDs. CONCLUSIONS: Use of SGLT2is versus DPP4is was highly cost-effective for patients with T2D regardless of their CVD history in real-world clinical practice. Our results extend current evidence by showing SGLT2is as an economically rational alternative over DPP4is for T2D treatment in routine care. Future research is warranted to explore the heterogeneous economic benefits of SGLT2is given diverse patient characteristics in clinical settings.

Cost-effectiveness of GLP-1 receptor agonists versus insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a real-world study and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: To conduct a real-word-study-based cost-effectiveness analysis of a GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) versus insulin among type 2 diabetes patients requiring intensified injection therapy and a systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies of GLP-1RAs versus insulin. METHODS: Individual-level analyses incorporating real-world effectiveness and cost data were conducted for a cohort of 1022 propensity-score-matched pairs of GLP-1RA and insulin users from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, 2007-2016. Study outcomes included the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one case of clinical events, healthcare costs, and cost per case of event prevented. Costs were in 2019 US dollars. Analyses were performed from a third-party payer and healthcare sector perspectives. Structured systematic review procedures were conducted to synthesize updated evidence on the cost-effectiveness of GLP-1RAs versus insulin. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up of 2.3 years, the NNT using a GLP-1RA versus insulin to prevent one case of all-cause mortality and hospitalized hypoglycemia was 57 and 30, respectively. Using GLP-1RAs instead of insulin cost US$54,851 and US$29,115 per case of all-cause mortality and hospitalized hypoglycemia prevented, respectively, from the payer perspective, and saved US$19,391 and US$10,293, respectively, from the healthcare sector perspective. Sensitivity analyses showed that the probability of using GLP-1RAs versus insulin being cost-effective for preventing one case of all-cause mortality or hospitalized hypoglycemia ranged from 60 to 100%. The systematic review revealed a cost-effective profile of using GLP-1RAs versus insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Using GLP-1RAs versus insulin for type 2 diabetes patients requiring intensified injection therapy in clinical practice is cost-effective.

Managing medication supply chains: Lessons learned from Taiwan during the COVID-19 pandemic and preparedness planning for the future.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has posed unprecedented challenges for nations worldwide, among which medication shortages can cause a devastatingly negative impact on global health. Using Taiwan as an example, this report describes the sources of potential medication shortages, discusses the preparedness and contingency strategies to address medication shortages, and outlines the evidence-based recommendations on ensuring a stable medication supply and improving the quality and security of medicines. Many drug shortages have focused on shortfalls of overseas manufacturing, but the effect of the COVID-19 crisis on misallocation of medications within the nation's internal supply chains is also a great concern. A wide range of stakeholders are involved in pharmaceutical supply chains, including government regulators, health care insurers, pharmaceutical companies, frontline physicians and pharmacists, patients and families, professional and patient associations or unions, and even individuals who acquire medications from abroad. Collaborative inputs and efforts from all these interdependent stakeholders are critical for establishing transparent preparedness and contingency plans to address drug shortages affected by disruptions of overseas manufacturing or stockouts in pharmacies owing to medication misallocation. Strategies have been documented and recommended in Taiwan and the United States to mitigate drug shortages and ensure the long-term quality and security of medicines. Barriers to accessing medicines are nothing new, but the COVID-19 pandemic poses urgent and even novel challenges to the stability and integrity of medication supply, which urges for a need to reconsider and reinforce effective management strategies for pharmaceuticals. Active management, transparent information, and timely communications are essential to ensure a stable supply of key therapeutic medications, especially during a pandemic.

Comparative cardiovascular safety of GLP-1 receptor agonists versus other glucose-lowering agents in real-world patients with type 2 diabetes: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence about the cardiovascular safety of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1ra) possesses limited generalizability to real-world patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in usual practice. This study aimed to investigate the comparative cardiovascular safety of GLP-1ra in comparisons with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i), sulfonylurea (SU), and insulin in a real-world population with T2D. METHODS: Adults with newly-diagnosed T2D were identified from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database in 2003-2014. A prevalent new-user cohort design was adopted to include a broad representation of real-world T2D patients being treated with GLP-1ra. The between-group comparability of baseline patient characteristics was achieved by matching on (1) initiation time of study drugs, (2) prior exposure to glucose-lowering agents, and (3) diabetes severity and complications, comorbidities, and concomitant cardiovascular medications using propensity scores. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and assessed up to the end of 2015. Cox modeling was employed to assess the association between study drugs and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3195 GLP-1ra stable users was identified in 2011-2014. 1893, 1829, and 1367 GLP-1ra stable users were 1:1 matched to DPP-4i, SU and insulin users, respectively. Compared to DPP-4i, SU and insulin, the use of GLP-1ra was associated with a lower risk of composite CVD events [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.73 (0.57-0.96), 0.76 (0.57-1.00), and 0.81 (0.62-1.07), respectively]. Subgroup analyses revealed that GLP-1ra versus DPP-4i yielded a greater cardiovascular benefit in those without established CVD versus those with established CVD. CONCLUSIONS: This comparison study extends the supporting evidence for the cardiovascular safety of GLP-1ra to a broad spectrum of real-world T2D patients using GLP-1ra.

Comparative predictive ability of visit-to-visit HbA1c variability measures for microvascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: To assess the associations of various HbA1c measures, including a single baseline HbA1c value, overall mean, yearly updated means, standard deviation (HbA1c-SD), coefficient of variation (HbA1c-CV), and HbA1c variability score (HVS), with microvascular disease (MVD) risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Linked data between National Cheng Kung University Hospital and Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database were utilized to identify the study cohort. The primary outcome was the composite MVD events (retinopathy, nephropathy, or neuropathy) occurring during the study follow-up. Cox model analyses were performed to assess the associations between HbA1c measures and MVD risk, with adjustment for patients' baseline HbA1c, demographics, comorbidities/complications, and treatments. RESULTS: In the models without adjustment for baseline HbA1c, all HbA1c variability and mean measures were significantly associated with MVD risk, except HVS. With adjustment for baseline HbA1c, HbA1c-CV had the strongest association with MVD risk. For every unit of increase in HbA1c-CV, the MVD risk significantly increased by 3.42- and 2.81-fold based on the models without and with adjustment for baseline HbA1c, respectively. The associations of HbA1c variability and mean measures with MVD risk in patients with baseline HbA1c < 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) were stronger compared with those in patients with baseline HbA1c ≥ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol). CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c variability, especially HbA1c-CV, can supplement conventional baseline HbA1c measure for explaining MVD risk. HbA1c variability may play a greater role in MVD outcomes among patients with relatively optimal baseline glycemic control compared to those with relatively poor baseline glycemic control.

Comparative effectiveness of dulaglutide versus liraglutide in Asian type 2 diabetes patients: a multi-institutional cohort study and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Head-to-head comparison of clinical effectiveness between dulaglutide and liraglutide in Asia is limited. This study was aimed to assess the real-world comparative effectiveness of dulaglutide versus liraglutide. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study by utilizing multi-institutional electronic medical records to identify real-world type 2 diabetes patients treated with dulaglutide or liraglutide during 2016-2018 in Taiwan and followed up until 2019. Effectiveness outcomes were assessed at every 3 months in the 1-year follow-up. Propensity score techniques were applied to enhance between-group comparability. Significant differences in changes of effectiveness outcomes between treatment groups during the follow-up were examined and further analyzed using mixed-model repeated-measures approaches. RESULTS: A total of 1512 subjects receiving dulaglutide and 1513 subjects receiving liraglutide were identified. At 12 months, significant HbA1c changes from baseline were found in both treatments (dulaglutide: - 1.06%, p < 0.001; liraglutide: - 0.83%, p < 0.001), with a significant between-group difference (- 0.23%, 95% confidence interval - 0.38 to - 0.08%, p < 0.01). Both treatments yielded significant declines in weight, alanine aminotransferase level, and estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline (dulaglutide: - 1.14 kg, - 3.08 U/L and - 2.08 mL/min/1.73 m2, p < 0.01; liraglutide: - 1.64 kg, - 3.65 U/L and - 2.33 mL/min/1.73 m2, p < 0.001), whereas only dulaglutide yielded a significant systolic blood pressure reduction (- 2.47 mmHg, p < 0.001). Between-group differences in changes of weight, blood pressure, and liver and renal functions at 12 months were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world T2D patients, dulaglutide versus liraglutide was associated with better glycemic control and comparable effects on changes of weight, blood pressure, and liver and renal functions.

Cost-effectiveness of long-acting insulin analogues vs intermediate/long-acting human insulin for type 1 diabetes: A population-based cohort followed over 10 years.

AIMS: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of long-acting insulin analogues (LAIAs) vs intermediate/long-acting human insulin (ILAHI) for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: Individual-level analyses were conducted within a longitudinal population-based cohort of 540 propensity score-matched T1D patients (LAIAs, n = 270; ILAHI, n = 270) with over 10 years of follow-up using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, 2004-2013, from third-party payer and healthcare sector perspectives. The study outcomes included the number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one case of clinical events (eg, hypoglycaemia, diabetes-related complications), medical costs, and cost per case of events prevented. Cost estimates are presented in 2013 British pounds (GBP, £). RESULTS: The NNTs using LAIAs vs ILAHI to avoid one case of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance, outpatient hypoglycaemia and any diabetes-related complications were 12, 9 and 10 for mean follow-up periods of 5.84, 6.02 and 3.62 years, respectively. From third-party payer and healthcare sector perspectives, using LAIAs instead of ILAHI saved GBP6924-GBP7116 per case of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance prevented, GBP5346-GBP5508 per case of outpatient hypoglycaemia prevented, and GBP3570-GBP3680 per case of any diabetes-related complications prevented. Sensitivity analyses considering sampling uncertainty showed that using LAIAs over ILAHI yields at least a 76% probability of cost-saving for avoiding one case of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance, outpatient hypoglycaemia or any diabetes-related complications. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world evidence reveals that compared with ILAHI, the greater pharmaceutical costs associated with LAIAs for patients with T1D could be substantially offset by savings from averted hypoglycaemia or diabetes-related complications.

Evaluating the Ability of Economic Models of Diabetes to Simulate New Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials: A Report on the Ninth Mount Hood Diabetes Challenge.

OBJECTIVES: The cardiovascular outcomes challenge examined the predictive accuracy of 10 diabetes models in estimating hard outcomes in 2 recent cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) and whether recalibration can be used to improve replication. METHODS: Participating groups were asked to reproduce the results of the Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) and the Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program. Calibration was performed and additional analyses assessed model ability to replicate absolute event rates, hazard ratios (HRs), and the generalizability of calibration across CVOTs within a drug class. RESULTS: Ten groups submitted results. Models underestimated treatment effects (ie, HRs) using uncalibrated models for both trials. Calibration to the placebo arm of EMPA-REG OUTCOME greatly improved the prediction of event rates in the placebo, but less so in the active comparator arm. Calibrating to both arms of EMPA-REG OUTCOME individually enabled replication of the observed outcomes. Using EMPA-REG OUTCOME-calibrated models to predict CANVAS Program outcomes was an improvement over uncalibrated models but failed to capture treatment effects adequately. Applying canagliflozin HRs directly provided the best fit. CONCLUSIONS: The Ninth Mount Hood Diabetes Challenge demonstrated that commonly used risk equations were generally unable to capture recent CVOT treatment effects but that calibration of the risk equations can improve predictive accuracy. Although calibration serves as a practical approach to improve predictive accuracy for CVOT outcomes, it does not extrapolate generally to other settings, time horizons, and comparators. New methods and/or new risk equations for capturing these CV benefits are needed.

Association of ambient air pollution with cardiovascular disease risks in people with type 2 diabetes: a Bayesian spatial survival analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited on excess risks of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) associated with ambient air pollution in diabetic populations. Survival analyses without considering the spatial structure and possible spatial correlations in health and environmental data may affect the precision of estimation of adverse environmental pollution effects. We assessed the association between air pollution and CVDs in type 2 diabetes through a Bayesian spatial survival approach. METHODS: Taiwan's national-level health claims and air pollution databases were utilized. Fine individual-level latitude and longitude were used to determine pollution exposure. The exponential spatial correlation between air pollution and CVDs was analyzed in our Bayesian model compared to traditional Weibull and Cox models. RESULTS: There were 2072 diabetic patients included in analyses. PM2.5 and SO2 were significant CVD risk factors in our Bayesian model, but such associations were attenuated or underestimated in traditional models; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) and 95% credible interval (CrI) or confidence interval (CI) of CVDs for a 1 µg/m3 increase in the monthly PM2.5 concentration for our model, the Weibull and Cox models was 1.040 (1.004-1.073), 0.994 (0.984-1.004), and 0.994 (0.984-1.004), respectively. With a 1 ppb increase in the monthly SO2 concentration, adjusted HR (95% CrI or CI) was 1.886 (1.642-2.113), 1.092 (1.022-1.168), and 1.091 (1.021-1.166) for these models, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Against traditional non-spatial analyses, our Bayesian spatial survival model enhances the assessment precision for environmental research with spatial survival data to reveal significant adverse cardiovascular effects of air pollution among vulnerable diabetic patients.

Effects on clinical outcomes of intensifying triple oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) therapy by initiating insulin versus enhancing OAD therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: A nationwide population-based, propensity-score-matched cohort study.

AIMS: To compare the effects of initiating insulin as a fourth-line antidiabetic therapy with the effects of enhancing oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with triple OAD therapy failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a nationwide population-based, retrospective cohort study involving 1022 (without prevalent diabetes-related complications [PDRCs]) and 2077 (with/without PDRCs) propensity score-matched pairs of fourth-line insulin therapy users and enhanced OAD therapy users identified in the period 2004 to 2010. Clinical outcomes including a composite cardiovascular outcome (myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure or ischaemic heart disease), peripheral vascular disease (PVD), hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality were assessed up to 2013. Hypoglycaemia was adjusted in Cox models to consider its potential effect on study outcomes. RESULTS: In a T2DM cohort without PDRCs, fourth-line insulin therapy was not associated with greater risks of clinical outcomes, except hypoglycaemia (hazard ratio [HR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.07), compared with enhanced OAD therapy. Among patients with T2DM with/without PDRCs, fourth-line insulin therapy was associated with greater risks of the composite cardiovascular outcome (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.03-1.46), heart failure (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.12-2.25), ischaemic heart disease (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.09-1.73), PVD (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.00-1.36), hypoglycaemia (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.20-1.85) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.01-2.17), but adjustment for hypoglycaemia significantly attenuated the risk of heart failure (HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.92-1.94), PVD (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98-1.34) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.84-1.99). CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of fourth-line insulin therapy can be considered for patients with T2DM with triple OAD therapy failure, and the importance of awareness and prevention of hypoglycaemia among insulin-treated patients with T2DM cannot be overstated.

Computer Modeling of Diabetes and Its Transparency: A Report on the Eighth Mount Hood Challenge.

OBJECTIVES: The Eighth Mount Hood Challenge (held in St. Gallen, Switzerland, in September 2016) evaluated the transparency of model input documentation from two published health economics studies and developed guidelines for improving transparency in the reporting of input data underlying model-based economic analyses in diabetes. METHODS: Participating modeling groups were asked to reproduce the results of two published studies using the input data described in those articles. Gaps in input data were filled with assumptions reported by the modeling groups. Goodness of fit between the results reported in the target studies and the groups' replicated outputs was evaluated using the slope of linear regression line and the coefficient of determination (R2). After a general discussion of the results, a diabetes-specific checklist for the transparency of model input was developed. RESULTS: Seven groups participated in the transparency challenge. The reporting of key model input parameters in the two studies, including the baseline characteristics of simulated patients, treatment effect and treatment intensification threshold assumptions, treatment effect evolution, prediction of complications and costs data, was inadequately transparent (and often missing altogether). Not surprisingly, goodness of fit was better for the study that reported its input data with more transparency. To improve the transparency in diabetes modeling, the Diabetes Modeling Input Checklist listing the minimal input data required for reproducibility in most diabetes modeling applications was developed. CONCLUSIONS: Transparency of diabetes model inputs is important to the reproducibility and credibility of simulation results. In the Eighth Mount Hood Challenge, the Diabetes Modeling Input Checklist was developed with the goal of improving the transparency of input data reporting and reproducibility of diabetes simulation model results.

Why Are Diabetes Medications So Expensive and What Can Be Done to Control Their Cost?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purposes of this study were to describe how medication prices are established, to explain why antihyperglycemic medications have become so expensive, to show trends in expenditures for antihyperglycemic medications, and to highlight strategies to control expenditures in the USA. RECENT FINDINGS: In the U.S., pharmaceutical manufacturers set the prices for new products. Between 2002 and 2012, expenditures for antihyperglycemic medications increased from $10 billion to $22 billion. This increase was primarily driven by expenditures for insulin which increased sixfold. The increase in insulin expenditures may be attributed to several factors: the shift from inexpensive beef and pork insulins to more expensive genetically engineered human insulins and insulin analogs, dramatic price increases for the available insulins, physician prescribing practices, policies that limit payers' abilities to negotiate prices, and nontransparent negotiation of rebates and discounts. The costs of antihyperglycemic medications, especially insulin, have become a barrier to diabetes treatment. While clinical interventions to shift physician prescribing practices towards lower cost drugs may provide some relief, we will ultimately need policy interventions such as more stringent requirements for patent exclusivity, greater transparency in medication pricing, greater opportunities for price negotiation, and outcomes-based pricing models to control the costs of antihyperglycemic medications.

Cost effectiveness of an internet-delivered lifestyle intervention in primary care patients with high cardiovascular risk.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of an online adaptation of the diabetes prevention program (ODPP) lifestyle intervention. METHODS: ODPP was a before-after evaluation of a weight loss intervention comprising 16 weekly and 8 monthly lessons, incorporating behavioral tools and regular, brief, web-based individualized counseling in an overweight/obese cohort (mean age 52, 76% female, 92% white, 28% with diabetes). A Markov model was developed to estimate ODPP cost effectiveness compared with usual care (UC) to reduce metabolic risk over 10years. Intervention costs and weight change outcomes were obtained from the study; other model parameters were based on published reports. In the model, diabetes risk was a function of weight change with and without the intervention. RESULTS: Compared to UC, the ODPP in our cohort cost $14,351 and $29,331 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from the health care system and societal perspectives, respectively. In a hypothetical cohort without diabetes, the ODPP cost $7777 and $18,263 per QALY gained, respectively. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses, but enrolling cohorts with lower annual risk of developing diabetes (≤1.8%), enrolling fewer participants (≤15), or increasing the hourly cost (≥$91.20) or annual per-participant time (≥1.45h) required for technical support could increase ODPP cost to >$20,000 per QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, ODPP was cost-effective in 20-58% of model iterations using an acceptability threshold of $20,000, 73-92% at $50,000, and 95-99% at $100,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: The ODPP may offer an economical approach to combating overweight and obesity.

Impact of Glucose-Lowering Medications on Health-Related Quality of Life in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE).

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes is associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Information on the relationship between HRQoL and glucose-lowering medications in recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) is limited. We assessed changes in HRQoL in participants with T2D receiving metformin plus one of four glucose-lowering medications in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A total of 5,047 participants, baseline mean age 57 years, with <10 years T2D duration and glycated hemoglobin level 6.8-8.5% and taking metformin monotherapy, were randomly assigned to glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin. HRQoL was evaluated at baseline for 4,885 participants, and at years 1, 2, and 3, with use of the self-administered version of the Quality of Well-being Scale (QWB-SA) and SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary scales. Linear models were used to analyze changes in HRQoL over time in intention-to-treat analyses. RESULTS: None of the medications worsened HRQoL. There were no differences in QWB-SA or MCS by treatment group at any time point. PCS scores improved with liraglutide versus other groups at year 1 only. Greater weight loss during year 1 explained half the improvement in PCS scores with liraglutide versus glargine and glimepiride. Liraglutide participants in the upper tertile of baseline BMI showed the greatest improvement in PCS scores at year 1. CONCLUSIONS: Adding liraglutide to metformin in participants within 10 years of T2D diagnosis showed improvement in the SF-36 PCS in comparisons with the other medications at 1 year, which was no longer significant at years 2 and 3. Improvement was related to weight loss and baseline BMI.

Differential Effects of Type 2 Diabetes Treatment Regimens on Diabetes Distress and Depressive Symptoms in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE).

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether adding basal insulin to metformin in adults with early type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) would increase emotional distress relative to other treatments. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) of adults with T2DM of <10 years' duration, HbA1c 6.8-8.5%, and taking metformin monotherapy randomly assigned participants to add insulin glargine U-100, sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor sitagliptin. The Emotional Distress Substudy enrolled 1,739 GRADE participants (mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, 32% female, 56% non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic) and assessed diabetes distress and depressive symptoms every 6 months. Analyses examined differences at 1 year and over the 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Across treatments, diabetes distress (-0.24, P < 0.0001) and depressive symptoms (-0.67, P < 0.0001) decreased over 1 year. Diabetes distress was lower at 1 year for the glargine group than for the other groups combined (-0.10, P = 0.002). Diabetes distress was also lower for liraglutide than for glimepiride or sitagliptin (-0.10, P = 0.008). Over the 3-year follow-up, there were no significant group differences in total diabetes distress; interpersonal diabetes distress remained lower for those assigned to liraglutide. No significant differences were observed for depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expectations, this randomized trial found no evidence for a deleterious effect of basal insulin on emotional distress. Glargine lowered diabetes distress modestly at 1 year rather than increasing it. Liraglutide also reduced diabetes distress at 1 year. Results can inform treatment decisions for adults with early T2DM.

Value of GLP-1 receptor agonists versus long-acting insulins for type 2 diabetes patients with and without established cardiovascular or chronic kidney diseases: A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis using real-world data.

AIMS: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) versus long-acting insulins (LAIs) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using real-world data. METHODS: A Markov model was utilized to estimate healthcare costs (US$) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of receiving treatments over 10 years from the healthcare sector perspective. Model inputs were derived from the analyses of Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database or published literature on Taiwanese T2D populations. Base-case analysis was performed for the overall study cohort and subgroup analyses were stratified by the presence or absence of established cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) or chronic kidney diseases (CKDs). RESULTS: Overall, using GLP-1RAs versus LAIs cost $6,053 per QALY gained. Results were robust across sensitivity and scenario analyses. Among patients with established CVDs and CKDs, GLP-1RA versus LAI therapy saved $673 (cost-saving) and cost $1,675 per QALY gained, respectively. Among patients without established CVDs and CKDs, GLP-1RA versus LAI therapy cost $9,093 and $7,659 per QALY gained, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using GLP-1RAs versus LAIs for T2D patients represented good economic value in real-world practice. Pronounced economic benefits of GLP-1RA therapy among those with prior CVDs or CKDs support rational treatment decisions and optimal healthcare resource allocation for these patients.

Cost-effectiveness of Novel Macrophage-Regulating Treatment for Wound Healing in Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers From the Taiwan Health Care Sector Perspective.

Importance: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and subsequent amputation incur enormous health and economic burdens to patients, health care systems, and societies. As a novel macrophage-regulating drug, ON101 is a breakthrough treatment for DFUs, which demonstrated significant complete wound healing effects in a phase 3 randomized clinical trial, but its economic value remains unknown. Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of an ON101 cream added on to general wound care (GWC; ie, conventional treatments for DFUs, which comprised initial and regular foot examinations, ulcer management, comorbidity control, patient education, and multidisciplinary care) vs GWC alone for DFUs from the Taiwan health care sector perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used a hypothetical cohort of patients with diabetes, with characteristics mirroring those of the participants in the ON101 trial. A Markov state-transition simulation model was constructed to estimate costs and health outcomes associated with the ON101 with GWC and GWC alone strategies over a 5-year time horizon, discounting costs and effectiveness at 3% annually. Costs were in 2021 US dollars. Data were sourced from the ON101 trial and supplemented from published literature. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty of input parameters and study generalizability. The analysis was designed and conducted from September 1, 2020, to January 31, 2022. Exposures: ON101 with GWC vs GWC alone. Main Outcomes and Measures: DFU-related complications, costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results: Patients in the hypothetical cohort had a mean age of 57 years and an uninfected DFU of 1 to 25 cm2 that was present for 4 or more weeks with a Wagner grade of 1 or 2. Over 5 years, the ON101 with GWC group vs the GWC alone group experienced more healing events, stayed for a longer time in the healing state, and had fewer infected DFUs, gangrene, and amputations (eg, 2787 additional healing events and 2766 fewer infected DFU, 72 fewer amputation, and 7 fewer gangrene events in the ON101 with GWC group vs GWC alone group). The ON101 with GWC strategy vs GWC alone yielded an additional 0.038 QALYs at an incremental cost of $571, resulting in $14 922/QALY gained. Economic results were most sensitive to healing efficacy, drug cost, and health utility of the healing state. Cost-saving results were observed in patient subgroups with poor glycemic control, larger ulcer sizes, longer ulcer durations, and current smoking. The ON101 with GWC strategy was considered cost-effective in 60% to 82% of model iterations against willingness-to-pay thresholds of $32 787/QALY gained to $98 361/QALY gained. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation study using a simulated patient cohort, the ON101 with GWC strategy represented good value compared with GWC alone for patients with DFUs from the Taiwan health care sector perspective and may be prioritized for those with high risks for disease progression of DFUs.