Cost of achieving HbA1c and weight loss treatment targets with IDegLira vs insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart in the USA.

BACKGROUND: Compared with basal-bolus insulin therapy (insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart), IDegLira has been shown to be associated with similar improvements in HbA1c, with superior weight loss and reduced hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. The present analysis evaluated the cost per patient with type 2 diabetes achieving HbA1c-focused and composite treatment targets with IDegLira and insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart (≤4 times daily). METHODS: The proportions of patients achieving treatment targets were obtained from the treat-to-target, non-inferiority DUAL VII study (NCT02420262). The annual cost per patient achieving target (cost of control) was analyzed from a US healthcare payer perspective. The annual cost of control was assessed for eight prespecified endpoints and four post-hoc endpoints. RESULTS: The number needed to treat to bring one patient to targets of HbA1c <7.0% and HbA1c ≤6.5% was similar with IDegLira and insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart. However, when weight gain and/or hypoglycemia were included, the number needed to treat was lower with IDegLira. IDegLira and insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart had similar costs of control for HbA1c <7.0%. However, cost of control values were substantially lower with IDegLira when the more stringent target of HbA1c ≤6.5% was used, and when patient-centered outcomes of hypoglycemia risk and impact on weight were included. CONCLUSION: IDegLira was shown to be a cost-effective treatment vs insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart for patients with type 2 diabetes not achieving glycemic targets on basal insulin in the USA.

Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus liraglutide added to basal insulin for patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control on basal insulin in the USA.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: IDegLira, a fixed ratio combination of insulin degludec and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, utilizes the complementary mechanisms of action of these two agents to improve glycemic control with low risk of hypoglycemia and avoidance of weight gain. The aim of the present analysis was to assess the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira vs liraglutide added to basal insulin, for patients with type 2 diabetes not achieving glycemic control on basal insulin in the US setting. METHODS: Projections of lifetime costs and clinical outcomes were made using the IMS CORE Diabetes Model. Treatment effect data for patients receiving IDegLira and liraglutide added to basal insulin were modeled based on the outcomes of a published indirect comparison, as no head-to-head clinical trial data is currently available. Costs were accounted in 2015 US dollars ($) from a healthcare payer perspective. RESULTS: IDegLira was associated with small improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy compared with liraglutide added to basal insulin (8.94 vs 8.91 discounted quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]). The key driver of improved clinical outcomes was the greater reduction in glycated hemoglobin associated with IDegLira. IDegLira was associated with mean costs savings of $17,687 over patient lifetimes vs liraglutide added to basal insulin, resulting from lower treatment costs and cost savings as a result of complications avoided. CONCLUSIONS: The present long-term modeling analysis found that IDegLira was dominant vs liraglutide added to basal insulin for patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control on basal insulin in the US, improving clinical outcomes and reducing direct costs.

Modeling the clinical and economic implications of obesity using microsimulation.

OBJECTIVES: The obesity epidemic has raised considerable public health concerns, but there are few validated longitudinal simulation models examining the human and economic cost of obesity. This paper describes a microsimulation model as a comprehensive tool to understand the relationship between body weight, health, and economic outcomes. METHODS: Patient health and economic outcomes were simulated annually over 10 years using a Markov-based microsimulation model. The obese population examined is nationally representative of obese adults in the US from the 2005-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, while a matched normal weight population was constructed to have similar demographics as the obese population during the same period. Prediction equations for onset of obesity-related comorbidities, medical expenditures, economic outcomes, mortality, and quality-of-life came from published trials and studies supplemented with original research. Model validation followed International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research practice guidelines. RESULTS: Among surviving adults, relative to a matched normal weight population, obese adults averaged $3900 higher medical expenditures in the initial year, growing to $4600 higher expenditures in year 10. Obese adults had higher initial prevalence and higher simulated onset of comorbidities as they aged. Over 10 years, excess medical expenditures attributed to obesity averaged $4280 annually-ranging from $2820 for obese category I to $5100 for obese category II, and $8710 for obese category III. Each excess kilogram of weight contributed to $140 higher annual costs, on average, ranging from $136 (obese I) to $152 (obese III). Poor health associated with obesity increased work absenteeism and mortality, and lowered employment probability, personal income, and quality-of-life. CONCLUSIONS: This validated model helps illustrate why obese adults have higher medical and indirect costs relative to normal weight adults, and shows that medical costs for obese adults rise more rapidly with aging relative to normal weight adults.

Ethnic differences in the association between gestational diabetes and pregnancy outcome.

The purpose of the study was to examine ethnic variation in the impact of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) on birth outcome. The authors examined the association between GDM and pregnancy-induced hypertension, macrosomia, primary Cesarean delivery, and preterm birth, using New York City Birth Certificate data from 2001-2006. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the crude and adjusted odds ratios of GDM with each adverse perinatal event, stratified by ethnicity. GDM was associated with increased risk of adverse perinatal events among all ethnic groups, with modest variation by ethnicity. Across ethnic groups, adjusted odds ratios comparing women with and without GDM ranged from 1.4-2.9 for pregnancy-induced hypertension, 1.0-2.2 for macrosomia, 1.1-1.8 for primary Cesarean delivery, and 1.3-1.8 for preterm birth. Overall, Caribbean, Sub-Saharan African, and African American women tended to show a larger relative impact of GDM, while North African, South Central Asian, and Chinese women showed a comparatively smaller impact of GDM. Although some ethnic variation was seen, differences in effect size were not large enough to support ethnic-specific thresholds for GDM diagnosis and treatment.