Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Med Econ ; 18(1): 56-68, 2015 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25271378

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) vs insulin glargine (IGlar) as part of a basal-bolus treatment regimen in adults with T1DM, using a short-term economic model. METHODS: Data from two phase III clinical studies were used to populate a simple and transparent short-term model. The costs and effects of treatment with IDeg vs IGlar were calculated over a 12-month period. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the degree of uncertainty surrounding the results. The main outcome measure, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), was the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option vs IGlar in patients with T1DM on a basal-bolus regimen. The base case ICER was estimated at £16,895/QALY, which is below commonly accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness in the UK. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the ICER was stable to variations in the majority of input parameters. The parameters that exerted the most influence on the ICER were hypoglycemia event rates, daily insulin dose, and disutility associated with non-severe nocturnal hypoglycemic events. However, even under extreme assumptions in the majority of analyses the ICERs remained below the commonly accepted threshold of £20,000-£30,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: This short-term modeling approach accommodates the treat-to-target trial design required by regulatory bodies, and focuses on the impact of important aspects of insulin therapy such as hypoglycemia and dosing. For patients with T1DM who are treated with a basal-bolus insulin regimen, IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option compared with IGlar. IDeg may be particularly cost-effective for sub-groups of patients, such as those suffering from recurrent nocturnal hypoglycemia and those with impaired awareness of hypoglycemia.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/economia , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/economia , Automonitorização da Glicemia , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina Glargina , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/uso terapêutico , Modelos Econométricos , Programas Nacionais de Saúde , Agulhas/economia , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Reino Unido
2.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 16(4): 366-75, 2014 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24373113

RESUMO

AIMS: The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine (IGlar) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who are considered appropriate for treatment with a basal insulin analogue, using a short-term economic model. METHODS: Meta-analysis data from three phase III clinical studies were used to populate a simple and transparent short-term model. The costs and effects of treatment with IDeg versus IGlar were calculated over a 12-month period. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the degree of uncertainty surrounding the results. RESULTS: IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option versus IGlar in patients with T2DM using basal insulin. Base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated at £15,795 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and £13,078 per QALY, which are below commonly accepted thresholds for cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that hypoglycaemia event rates had an important effect on the results. With higher event rates for non-severe hypoglycaemia IDeg was less costly and more effective than IGlar (dominant). Conversely, using lower event rates for severe hypoglycaemia generated higher ICERs. Using hypoglycaemia rates from a subgroup of patients who experienced ≥1 hypoglycaemic event per year IDeg was highly cost-effective versus IGlar; with estimated ICERS of £4887 and £2625 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: This short-term modelling approach allows the economic evaluation of newer insulin analogues when advanced long-term modelling based on HbA1c differences is inappropriate. For patients with T2DM who are considered appropriate for treatment with a basal insulin analogue, IDeg is a cost-effective treatment option compared with IGlar and offers additional benefits to subgroups of patients, such as those suffering from recurrent hypoglycaemia.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/economia , Hipoglicemiantes/economia , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/economia , Insulina/análogos & derivados , Adulto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemiantes/administração & dosagem , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/administração & dosagem , Insulina de Ação Prolongada/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Modelos Econômicos , Programas Nacionais de Saúde/economia , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Resultado do Tratamento , Reino Unido
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA