The association between body mass index and health-related quality of life in the 2017 and 2018 health survey of England data: A cross-sectional observational analysis.

AIM: To provide an updated estimate of the association between body mass index (BMI) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among the general population in England and to identify population subgroups with the highest potential utility gains from obesity interventions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample included 12 158 adults with valid HRQoL and BMI data from the 2017 and 2018 Health Survey for England. Robust standard error linear regression, controlling for demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, lifestyle behaviours and obesity-related comorbidities, was used for the baseline analysis. Robustness checks assessed the impact of (a) estimator selection; (b) model specifications; (c) statistical outliers at high BMI; (d) potential BMI measurement error; and (e) data pooling. RESULTS: The study found a significant association between HRQoL and BMI, which exhibited an inverted U-shaped relationship. The mean HRQoL peaked at 25.7 kg/m2 in men and 22.6 kg/m2 in women and was reduced in the underweight, overweight and obesity BMI ranges. Sensitivity analyses reported similar coefficients, suggesting a robust model specification. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced HRQoL beyond optimal BMI underlines the importance of maintaining a normal BMI range for overall health. The rising prevalence of class III obesity is a major public health concern given its disproportionate impact on health, health care utilization and costs. Obesity management is key to preventing the reduction in HRQoL associated with obesity-related comorbidities, and this analysis supports the development of targeted policies and population health initiatives for people with class III obesity.

The improved health utility of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg compared with placebo in the STEP 1-4 obesity trials.

AIM: To assess health utility values in the Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with obesity (STEP) 1-4 trials. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The STEP 1-4 phase 3a, 68-week, double-blind randomized controlled trials assessed the efficacy and safety of semaglutide 2.4 mg versus placebo in individuals with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher or a BMI of 27 kg/m2 or higher and at least one comorbidity (STEP 1, 3 and 4), or a BMI of 27 kg/m2 or higher and type 2 diabetes (STEP 2). Patients received lifestyle intervention plus intensive behavioural therapy in STEP 3. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the Short Form 36-item Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) at baseline and week 68. Scores were converted into Short Form Six-Dimension version 2 (SF-6Dv2) utility scores or mapped onto the European Quality of Life Five-Dimension Three-Level (EQ-5D-3L) utility index using UK health utility weights. RESULTS: At week 68, semaglutide 2.4 mg was associated with minor health utility score improvements from baseline (all trials), while scores for placebo typically decreased. SF-6Dv2 treatment differences by week 68 for semaglutide 2.4 mg versus placebo were significant in STEP 1 and 4 (P ≤ .001), but not STEP 2 or 3. EQ-5D-3L treatment differences by week 68 for semaglutide 2.4 mg versus placebo were significant in STEP 1, 2 and 4 (P < .001 for all), but not STEP 3. CONCLUSIONS: Semaglutide 2.4 mg was associated with improvement in health utility scores compared with placebo, reaching statistical significance in STEP 1, 2 and 4.

Changes in longevity inequality by education among OECD countries before the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in life expectancy between socioeconomic groups are one of the main challenges for health policy, and their reduction over time is an important policy objective. METHODS: Observational study using routinely registered data on mortality around 2011 and 2016 by sex, age, educational attainment level, and cause of death in 13 member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The main outcome measures are life expectancy by education at the ages of 25 and 65 in 2011 and 2016. RESULTS: Between 2011 and 2016, the life expectancy gap has increased by 0·2 years among men and 0·3 years among women from 13 available countries. The United States recorded one the largest increases in the absolute life expectancy gap, 1·3 years for women and 1·1 years for men respectively. CONCLUSION: Inequality in longevity has increased in over half of the countries surveyed and starkly so in the United States in a context of deteriorating health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Educational inequalities in deaths of despair in 14 OECD countries: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: Deaths of despair are a key contributor to stagnating life expectancy in the USA, especially among those without a university-level education, but these findings have not been compared internationally. METHODS: Mortality and person-year population exposure data were collected in 14 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development member countries and stratified by age, sex, educational attainment and cause of death. The sample included 1.4 billion person-year observations from persons aged ≥25 years between 2013 and 2019. Country-specific and sex-specific contributions of deaths of despair to: (a) the life expectancy gap at age 25 and (b) rate differences in age-standardised mortality rates between high and low educational attainment groups were calculated. RESULTS: Eliminating deaths of despair could reduce the life expectancy gap in the USA by 1.1 years for men and 0.6 years for women was second only to Korea, where it would reduce the gap by 3.4 years for men and 2.2 years for women. In Italy, Spain and Türkiye, eliminating deaths of despair would improve life expectancy gains by less than 0.1 years for women and 0.3 years for men, closing the educational gap by <1%. Findings were robust to controls for differences in population structures. CONCLUSIONS: Deaths of despair are a major determinant of educational inequalities in longevity in Korea and the USA, while having limited impact in Southern European countries, indicating substantial international variation and scope for improvement in high burden high-income countries.

Once-Weekly Subcutaneous Semaglutide 2.4 mg Injection is Cost-Effective for Weight Management in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the current preliminary study was to present the cost-effectiveness analyses submitted to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (TA10765) that deemed semaglutide 2.4 mg subcutaneous (s.c.) injection a cost-effective option for weight management in the United Kingdom (UK) alongside diet and exercise (D&E). METHODS: The study was conducted from the National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services perspective and based on the NICE reference case. The clinical safety and efficacy of semaglutide 2.4 mg s.c. injection were obtained from the Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity (STEP) 1 trial. The previously published and validated Core Obesity Model was used to project lifetime occurrence of obesity complications, their costs and quality of life consequences over 40 years. The base case cohort had a mean starting age of 48 years and BMI of 38.7 kg/m2. The confidential NHS price for semaglutide 2.4 mg s.c. injection was provided by Novo Nordisk. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were expressed as cost/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Uncertainty was assessed through sensitivity analyses, including a scenario analysis using clinical data from the STEP 2 trial and a previously published and validated Core Diabetes Model to investigate a cohort with type 2 diabetes at baseline. RESULTS: Semaglutide 2.4 mg s.c. injection showed higher total costs and health benefits compared with D&E, with an ICER of £14,827/QALY gained. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that semaglutide 2.4 mg s.c. injection was cost-effective in 90% of cases at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000/QALY. The ICER from the scenario analysis for the diabetic population was £16,613/QALY gained, using the Core Diabetes Model. CONCLUSION: Semaglutide 2.4 mg s.c. injection is a cost-effective therapy compared to D&E alone for patients with obesity and weight-related comorbidities in the UK. Sensitivity and scenario analyses confirm the robustness of the analyses.