Cost-effectiveness evaluation of add-on dapagliflozin for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction from perspective of healthcare systems in Asia-Pacific region.

BACKGROUND: With emerging evidence on the efficacy of adding dapagliflozin to standard care for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), this study assessed the cost-effectiveness of add-on dapagliflozin to standard care versus standard care alone for HFrEF from the perspective of healthcare systems in the Asia-Pacific region. METHODS: A Markov model was applied to project the outcomes of treatment in terms of lifetime medical cost and quality-adjusted life-years. The transition probabilities between health states in the model were obtained from the Dapagliflozin in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction trial. Country-specific costs and utilities were extracted for modeling. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio against a country-specific willingness-to-pay threshold was applied to determine the cost-effectiveness of treatment. A series of sensitivity analyses were performed to ensure the robustness of the study results. Costs are presented in 2020 United States dollars. RESULTS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for add-on dapagliflozin versus standard care alone were $5277, $9980, $12,305, $16,705, and $23,227 per quality-adjusted life-year gained in Korea, Australia, Taiwan, Japan, and Singapore, respectively. When using add-on dapagliflozin to standard care versus standard care alone, ~ 100% of simulations were cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of one gross domestic product per capita of the given Asia-Pacific country; however, the probability of being cost-effective for using add-on dapagliflozin decreased when the time horizon for simulation was restricted to 18 months and when the cardiovascular mortality for the two treatments (43.8% and 33.0%, respectively) was assumed to be the same. The cost-effectiveness results were most sensitive to cardiovascular mortality of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Adding dapagliflozin to standard care is cost-effective for HFrEF in healthcare systems in the Asia-Pacific region, which supports the rational use of dapagliflozin for HFrEF in this region.

The cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin compared to DPP-4 inhibitors in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Netherlands.

AIM: When glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes is not achieved with metformin and sulfonylurea alone, adding another oral anti-diabetes drug, such as a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor, is an alternative to starting insulin. The aim of this study is to determine the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin (an SGLT2 inhibitor) compared with DPP-4 inhibitors when added to metformin and sulfonylurea in people with type 2 diabetes in the Netherlands. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis is performed using the Cardiff diabetes model, a fixed-time increment stochastic simulation model informed by 'United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 68' risk equations. The base-case analysis uses a 40-year time horizon, a Dutch societal perspective and differential discounting (4% for costs, 1.5% for effects). Inputs are obtained from the literature and Dutch price lists. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis are performed. RESULTS: Dapagliflozin is dominant compared with DPP-4 inhibitors, resulting in a €990 cost saving and a 0.28 quality-adjusted life year gain over 40 years. Cost savings are associated mainly with treatment costs and a reduced incidence of micro- and macrovascular complications, among others nephropathy, myocardial infarction and stroke. Results are robust to changes in input parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin is a cost-saving alternative to DPP-4 inhibitors when added to metformin and sulfonylurea. The incidence of micro- and macrovascular complications is lower for people treated with dapagliflozin. Uncertainty around this outcome is low.

Comparison of heart failure risk and medical costs between patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with dapagliflozin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: a nationwide population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Dapagliflozin is one of the novel glucose-lowering agents, which has recently been reported to reduce the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (hHF). The present study aimed to compare the differences between the risk of hHF after using dapagliflozin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) as second-line drugs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus using the latest nationwide population data in Korea. Additionally, we aimed to examine the impact of clinical outcomes on direct medical costs in the two groups. METHODS: The present population-based, retrospective cohort study was conducted using the nationwide claims data between September 01, 2014 and June 30, 2018. New users of dapagliflozin and DPP-4i were identified from the database and the differences in patients' characteristics between the two groups were analyzed using propensity score-weighted analysis. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to estimate the risk of hHF. A simple model was used for the estimation of direct medical costs for 3 years. RESULTS: In total, 23,147 patients in the dapagliflozin group and 237,187 patients in the DPP-4i group were selected for the analysis. The incidence rates of hHF were 3.86 and 6.79 per 1000 person-years in the dapagliflozin and DPP-4i groups, respectively. In the entire study population, the hazard ratio for hHF in the dapagliflozin group compared to the DPP-4i group was 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.46-0.74), with 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.41-0.74) among patients with underlying cardiovascular disease and 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.46-0.95) among patients without underlying cardiovascular disease. The direct medical costs were $57,787 lower in the dapagliflozin group than in the DPP-4i group for 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that dapagliflozin lowers the risk for hHF and subsequently reduces direct medical costs compared to DPP-4i. The protective effect against hHF was more evident among patients with underlying cardiovascular disease.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin treatment in people with Type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial.

AIM: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, empagliflozin therapy reduced cardiovascular death by 38% compared with placebo when added to standard of care. Using the trial results, we created a discrete-event simulation model to assess lifetime health economic outcomes in people with Type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Time-dependent survival regression analysis was performed on data from EMPA-REG OUTCOME for 10 cardiovascular and renal events (e.g. stroke, heart failure hospitalization, macroalbuminuria, cardiovascular mortality) to capture event rates over time, and interaction between events. Model performance was assessed by comparing predicted and observed outcomes at 3 years. Costs in the United Kingdom (UK) and health utilities were obtained from published literature. Outcomes included cumulative event rates, life-years, costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: The model predicted an 18% relative increase (by 2.1 life-years) in survival for empagliflozin (14.0 life-years) vs. standard of care (11.9 life-years), attributable to direct treatment effect on cardiovascular mortality, and to indirect effect via reductions in other events. Participants treated with empagliflozin may experience improved quality of life (1.0 QALY) and higher costs (£3737/participant), yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £4083/QALY. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results to changes in input parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Based on extrapolation of EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial data using a participant-level simulation model, empagliflozin in addition to standard of care is projected to be highly cost-effective using UK healthcare costs. The impact in other countries will vary due to differences in drug pricing and accrual of other costs. (Clinical Trial Registry No: NCT01131676).

Dapagliflozin vs non-SGLT-2i treatment is associated with lower healthcare costs in type 2 diabetes patients similar to participants in the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial: A nationwide observational study.

AIMS: To investigate how the cardiovascular (CV) risk benefits of dapagliflozin translate into healthcare costs compared with other non-sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs) in a real-world population with type 2 diabetes (T2D) that is similar to the population of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial. METHODS: Patients initiating dapagliflozin or oGLDs between 2013 and 2016 in Swedish nationwide healthcare registries were included if they fulfilled inclusion and exclusion criteria of the DECLARE-TIMI 58 trial (DECLARE-like population). Propensity scores for the likelihood of dapagliflozin initiation were calculated, followed by 1:3 matching with initiators of oGLDs. Per-patient cumulative costs for hospital healthcare (in- and outpatient) and for drugs were calculated from new initiation until end of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 24 828 patients initiated a new GLD; 6207 initiated dapagliflozin and 18 621 initiated an oGLD. After matching based on 96 clinical and healthcare cost variables, groups were balanced at baseline. Mean cumulative 30-month healthcare cost per patient was similar in the dapagliflozin and oGLD groups ($11 807 and $11 906, respectively; difference, -$99; 95% CI, -$629, $483; P = 0.644). Initiation of dapagliflozin rather than an oGLD was associated with significantly lower hospital costs (-$658; 95% CI, -$1169, -$108; P = 0.024) and significantly higher drug costs ($559; 95% CI, $471, $648; P < 0.001). Hospital cost difference was related mainly to fewer CV- and T2D-associated complications with use of dapagliflozin compared with use of an oGLD (-$363; 95% CI, -$665, -$61; P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: In a nationwide, real-world, DECLARE-like population, dapagliflozin was associated with lower hospital costs compared with an oGLD, mainly as a result of reduced rates of CV- and T2D-associated complications.

Comparison of healthcare resource utilization and costs in patients with type 2 diabetes initiating dapagliflozin versus sitagliptin.

AIMS: To compare healthcare costs and utilization in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who initiated dapagliflozin (DAPA) with costs and utilization in those who initiated sitagliptin (SITA) in a real-world setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study of health plan enrollees in two US commercial claims databases or Medicare Part D. The study population comprised adult patients with T2D who initiated DAPA or SITA between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2015. DAPA and SITA initiators were propensity-score-matched, and healthcare utilization and costs during the 1-year follow-up period were compared. Analyses were conducted separately for patients with evidence of oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) monotherapy use at baseline. RESULTS: A total of 2722 patients were included in each matched cohort. Follow-up unadjusted all-cause costs ($16 065 and $17 281; P = 0.135) and diabetes-related costs ($9697 and $9354; P = 0.539) were similar in the DAPA and SITA cohorts. Higher office and outpatient visit costs in the SITA group were offset by higher pharmacy costs in the DAPA group. In the subgroup of 1804 patients with OAD monotherapy use at baseline, patients in the SITA group had higher total all-cause costs compared with those in the DAPA group ($14 884 vs. $12 353; P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Patients who initiated DAPA or SITA had similar all-cause and diabetes-related healthcare costs over 1 year of follow-up. In the subgroup of patients treated with OAD monotherapy at baseline (84% metformin monotherapy), those who initiated DAPA as add-on therapy had lower costs than patients who added SITA.

Comparison of the Efficacy, Side Effects, and Cost of Modafinil and Intranasal Mometasone Furoate in Obstructive Sleep Apnea-Hypopnea Syndrome: A Preliminary Clinical Study.

BACKGROUND Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) is characterized by repeated episodes of reduction in airflow due to the collapse of the upper airway during sleep. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcome, side effects, and cost of treatment between modafinil and intranasal mometasone furoate in patients with OSAHS. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients with OSAHS (N=250) were divided into two groups: the modafinil group (MG) (N=125) were treated with 100 mg modafinil twice a day; the intranasal mometasone furoate group (IMFG) (N=125) were treated with 100 µg of intranasal mometasone furoate in the evening. Quality of life, grading of OSAHS, plain-film radiography, the adenoidal-nasopharyngeal ratio (AN ratio), side effects, cost of treatment, and beneficial effects after discontinuation of treatment were evaluated for all patients. RESULTS Duration of sleep apnea was significantly reduced in the IMFG compared with the MG (p=0.0145, q=9.262). Modafinil and intranasal mometasone furoate both had moderate effects on improvement of the OSAHS score. The IMFG showed a significantly greater beneficial effect on the AN ratio when compared with the MG (p=0.0001, q=6.584). No adverse events of treatment with modafinil and intranasal mometasone furoate were reported. Cost of treatment and beneficial effect after discontinuation were both significantly greater for the IMFG compared with the MG. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this preliminary clinical study were that for patients diagnosed with OSAHS, night-time treatment with intranasal mometasone furoate was more effective than modafinil.

Inter-Sectoral Bisphenol A (BPA) Flows in the 2012 Chinese Economy.

Bisphenol A (BPA), a widely used petrochemical compound, has become an emerging global environmental management challenge because its leakage is associated with potential environmental and human health impacts. Until now, available BPA statistics have been limited to the products that directly use BPA. In this study, we delineate direct and indirect BPA flows for the 2012 Chinese economy. We find that construction, production of educational and recreational products, and automobile manufacturing are the most BPA-intensive sectors in terms of total BPA flows (300, 157, and 130 Gg total BPA flows, respectively). The public management and health sectors, however, incur significant indirect BPA flows, defined as embedded and inter-sectoral BPA placed into use, even though direct BPA use by these sectors is limited. By revealing the currently overlooked indirect BPA flows, this study reveals data gaps that are highly relevant to improving the accuracy of estimated BPA flows and losses. The method used herein is transferrable to other emerging and environmentally relevant materials, thereby providing the holistic understanding needed for cities, regions, or nations to design effective policy interventions.

The cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin versus sulfonylurea as an add-on to metformin in the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIMS: To assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor, compared with a sulfonylurea, when added to metformin for treatment of UK people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on metformin alone. METHODS: Clinical inputs sourced from a head-to-head randomized controlled trial (RCT) informed the Cardiff diabetes decision model. Risk equations developed from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) were used in conjunction with the clinical inputs to predict disease progression and the incidence of micro- and macrovascular complications over a lifetime horizon. Cost and utility data were generated to present the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for both treatment arms, and sensitivity and scenario analyses were conducted to assess the impact of uncertainty on the final model results. RESULTS: The dapagliflozin treatment arm was associated with a mean incremental benefit of 0.467 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.420; 0.665], with an incremental cost of £1246 (95% CI: £613; £1637). This resulted in an ICER point estimate of £2671 per QALY gained. Incremental costs were shown to be insensitive to parameter variation, with only treatment-related weight change having a significant impact on the incremental QALYs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis determined that dapagliflozin had a 100% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin in combination with metformin was shown to be a cost-effective treatment option compared with sulfonylurea from a UK healthcare perspective for people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus who are inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.

Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitors as an add-on to Metformin in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus from a UK Healthcare System Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic, progressive condition where the primary treatment goal is to maintain control of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). In order for healthcare decision makers to ensure patients receive the highest standard of care within the available budget, the clinical benefits of each treatment option must be balanced against the economic consequences. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin, the first-in-class sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, compared with a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i), when added to metformin for the treatment of patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on metformin alone. METHODS: The previously published and validated Cardiff diabetes model was used as the basis for this economic evaluation, with treatment effect parameters sourced from a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Costs, derived from a UK healthcare system perspective, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), were used to present the final outcome as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) over a lifetime horizon. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were carried out to assess uncertainty in the model results. RESULTS: Compared with DPP-4i, dapagliflozin was associated with a mean incremental benefit of 0.032 QALYs (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.022, 0.140) and with an incremental cost of £216 (95% CI: £-258, £795). This resulted in an ICER point estimate of £6,761 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis determined incremental costs to be insensitive to variation in most parameters, with only the treatment effect on weight having a notable impact on the incremental QALYs; however, there were no scenarios which raised the ICER above £15,000 per QALY. The PSA estimated that dapagliflozin had an 85% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin in combination with metformin was shown to be a cost-effective treatment option from a UK healthcare system perspective for patients with T2DM who are inadequately controlled on metformin alone.

[Cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin compared to DPP4 inhibitors and other oral antidiabetic drugs in the treatment of type-2 diabetes mellitus in Spain]. / Análisis de coste-efectividad de dapagliflozina en comparación con los inhibidores de la DPP4 y otros antidiabéticos orales en el tratamiento de la diabetes mellitus tipo 2 en España.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficiency of the combined therapy with metformin and dapagliflozin, a new oral anti-diabetic drug with an insulin-independent mechanism of action, in the treatment of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) compared to DPP4 inhibitors, sulphonylureas and thiazolidindiones, also combined with metformin. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis using a discrete event simulation model based on the results of the available clinical trials and considering patient's entire life as time horizon. SETTING: National Health System perspective. PARTICIPANTS: The model simulated the natural history of 30,000 patients with T2DM for each of the options compared. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and economic consequences of managing the disease and its complications. The analysis considered direct costs updated to 2013. A discount rate of 3% was applied to costs and health outcomes. RESULTS: In the main analysis comparing dapagliflozin with DPP4 inhibitors, dapagliflozin resulted in a treatment option that would provide a slightly higher effectiveness (0.019 QALY) and lower overall associated costs (-€42). In the additional analyses, dapagliflozin was a cost-effective option compared with sulphonylureas and thiazolidinediones resulting in a cost per QALY gained of €3,560 and €2,007, respectively. The univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the analyses performed suggested that dapagliflozin, in combination with metformin, would be a cost-effective alternative in the Spanish context for the treatment of T2DM.

Cost-effectiveness of add-on empagliflozin versus standard of care in management of CKD in Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam - findings from a modelling study assessing an EMPA-KIDNEY eligible population, using CKD progression model.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Nearly one in ten individuals in South-East Asia are estimated to be affected by chronic kidney disease (CKD). The burden of end-stage kidney disease is significant and can be heavy on the healthcare system. The recent EMPA-KIDNEY trial demonstrated a significant reduction in the risk of kidney disease progression or cardiovascular death in patients with CKD with a broad range of kidney function using add-on empagliflozin versus standard of care (SoC) alone. The objective of this study was to estimate the economic benefit of empagliflozin for patients with CKD in Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam. METHODS: An individual patient level simulation model with an annual cycle that estimates the progression of kidney function and associated risk-factors was employed. Local costs and mortality rates were estimated from a wide range of published literature. A healthcare perspective was used over a 50-year time horizon. RESULTS: The use of add-on empagliflozin versus SoC alone was found to be cost-saving in Malaysia and Thailand and cost-effective (ICER: 77,838,407 Vietnam Dong/QALY vs. a willingness to pay threshold of 96,890,026/QALY) in Vietnam. The bulk of the costs avoided over a lifetime is derived from the prevention or delay of dialysis initiation or kidney transplant - the cost offsets were nearly twice the additional treatment cost. The results were similar in patients with and without diabetes and across broad range of albuminuria. CONCLUSIONS: The use of add-on empagliflozin in a broad population of patients with CKD is expected to be cost-saving in Malaysia and Thailand and cost-effective in Vietnam and will help alleviate the increasing burden of CKD in the region.

Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin as add-on to standard of care for chronic kidney disease management in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: The sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor empagliflozin was approved for treatment of adults with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on the basis of its demonstrated ability to slow CKD progression and reduce the risk of cardiovascular death. This analysis was performed to assess the cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin plus standard of care (SoC) vs SoC alone in the treatment of CKD in the UK. METHODS: A comprehensive, patient-level CKD progression model that simulates the evolution of risk factors for disease progression based on CKD-specific equations and clinical data was used to project a broad range of CKD-related complications. Patient baseline characteristics, distribution across Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) health states, and changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), urine albumin-creatinine ratio (uACR), and other parameters while on treatment were derived from the EMPA-KIDNEY trial. UK cost and utilities/disutilities were sourced from the literature. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. Annual discounting of 3.5% was applied on costs and outcomes. RESULTS: Over a 50-year horizon, SoC resulted in per-patient costs, life years, and QALYs of £95,930, 8.55, and 6.28, respectively. Empagliflozin plus SoC resulted in an incremental gain in life years (+1.04) and QALYs (+0.84), while decreasing per-patient costs by £6,019. Empagliflozin was more effective and less costly (dominant) with a net monetary benefit of £22,849 at the willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000. Although treatment cost was higher for empagliflozin, this was more than offset by savings in kidney replacement therapy. Empagliflozin remained highly cost-effective in patients with and without diabetes, and across scenario and sensitivity analyses. LIMITATIONS: This analysis is limited by reliance on short-term clinical trial data and by uncertainties in modelling CKD progression. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin as an add-on to SoC for treatment of adults with CKD represents cost-effective use of UK National Health Service (NHS) resources.

Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin for patients with heart failure across the spectrum of ejection fraction: A pooled analysis of DAPA-HF and DELIVER data.

AIM: To assess the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin in addition to usual care, compared with usual care alone, in a large population of patients with heart failure (HF), spanning the full range of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patient-level data were pooled from HF trials (DAPA-HF, DELIVER) to generate a population including HF with reduced, mildly reduced and preserved LVEF, to increase statistical power and enable exploration of interactions among LVEF, renal function and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels, as they are relevant determinants of health status in this population. Survival and HF recurrent event risk equations were derived and applied to a lifetime horizon Markov model with health states defined by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score quartiles; costs and utilities were in the UK setting. The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was £6470 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, well below the UK willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of £20 000/QALY gained. In interaction sensitivity analyses, the highest ICER was observed for elderly patients with preserved LVEF (£16 624/QALY gained), and ranged to a region of dominance (increased QALYs, decreased costs) for patients with poorer renal function and reduced/mildly reduced LVEF. Results across the patient characteristic interaction plane were mostly between £5000 and £10 000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin plus usual care, versus usual care alone, yielded results well below the WTP threshold for the UK across a heterogeneous population of patients with HF including the full spectrum of LVEF, and is likely a cost-effective intervention.

The national financial burden of guideline directed medical therapy for heart failure patients from 2013 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: Guideline Directed Medical Therapy (GDMT) has been revolutionary in improving outcomes of heart failure patients. However, with the addition of more medication classes, the annual cost of these medications on the US healthcare system needs further evaluation. OBJECTIVES: We aim to evaluate the trend of annual cost of GDMT from 2013 to 2021 using the Medicare-part D Database. METHODS: Using Medicare Part D database (2013-2021), we determined the number of beneficiaries receiving these drugs, the total number of 30-day fills for each medication, and the total annual spending on these medications. Linear regression was used to analyze data using Python Programming Language. P value of less than 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: The estimated annual Medicare- part D spending on empagliflozin had a 50 % increase in cost between 2020 and 2021, which could be attributed to its FDA approval for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Empagliflozin cost Medicare 3.73 billion USD in 2021 alone. In addition, sacubitril-valsartan had a strong trajectory since its introduction to the market in 2015. Since its approval in July 2015, it cost Medicare 4.51 billion USD. The Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist class was the least costly class of GDMT. CONCLUSION: The rise in the cost of GDMT is not proportionate amongst the different classes of GDMT. Newer classes of medications cast a significant cost on Medicare in recent years.

Health economics perspective of fesoterodine, tolterodine or solifenacin as first-time therapy for overactive bladder syndrome in the primary care setting in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Overactive bladder (OAB) is associated with high healthcare costs, which may be partially driven by drug treatment. There is little comparative data on antimuscarinic drugs with respect to resource use and costs. This study was conducted to address this gap and the growing need for naturalistic studies comparing health economics outcomes in adult patients with OAB syndrome initiating treatment with different antimuscarinic drugs in a primary care setting in Spain. METHODS: Medical records from the databases of primary healthcare centres in three locations in Spain were assessed retrospectively. Men and women ≥18 years of age who initiated treatment with fesoterodine, tolterodine or solifenacin for OAB between 2008 and 2010 were followed for 52 weeks. Healthcare resource utilization and related costs in the Spanish National Health System were compared. Comparisons among drugs were made using multivariate general linear models adjusted for location, age, sex, time since diagnosis, Charlson comorbidity index, and medication possession ratio. RESULTS: A total of 1,971 medical records of patients (58.3% women; mean age, 70.1 [SD:10.6] years) initiating treatment with fesoterodine (n = 302), solifenacin (n = 952) or tolterodine (n = 717) were examined. Annual mean cost per patient was €1798 (95% CI: €1745; €1848). Adjusted mean (95% bootstrap CI) healthcare costs were significantly lower in patients receiving fesoterodine (€1639 [1542; 1725]) compared with solifenacin (€1780 [€1699; €1854], P = 0.022) or tolterodine (€1893 [€1815; €1969], P = 0.001). Cost differences occurred because of significantly fewer medical visits, and less use of absorbent products and OAB-related concomitant medication in the fesoterodine group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with solifenacin and tolterodine, fesoterodine was a cost-saving therapy for treatment of OAB in the primary care setting in Spain.

Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation versus extended release tolterodine for overactive bladder.

PURPOSE: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation vs extended release tolterodine for the treatment of overactive bladder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 1-year time frame cost-effectiveness model from a societal perspective was developed by comparing medical costs and quality of life determined by improved continence and therapy side effects of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation and tolterodine ER. Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation therapy consisted of 12 sessions for 3 months followed by maintenance therapy. Significant side effects of both strategies can result in reduced quality of life or therapy termination. Parameter estimates included utilities of improved urinary incontinence (0.92) and continued urinary incontinence (0.73), reduction in quality of life from side effects (5%), cost of percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation per session ($203) and cost of tolterodine ER per month ($150). Our primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, defined as the marginal cost per quality adjusted life-years gained. Less than $50,000 per quality adjusted life-year gained was considered cost-effective. The uncertainty of input parameters was addressed by 1-way sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation to assess the robustness of the model. RESULTS: Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation added significant cost to the management of overactive bladder with modest improvement in quality of life. For every 100 patients treated with percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation the costs increased by $303,480 and resulted in an additional 4.3 quality adjusted life-years gained compared to tolterodine ER. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $70,754 per quality adjusted life-year gained. In the Monte Carlo analysis percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation was cost-effective only 21% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation was not cost-effective for treating overactive bladder vs tolterodine ER under a wide range of clinical circumstances.

Cost-effectiveness of Dapagliflozin for Treatment of Patients With Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction.

Importance: In the Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial, dapagliflozin was shown to reduce cardiovascular mortality and hospitalizations due to heart failure while improving patient-reported health status. However, the cost-effectiveness of adding dapagliflozin therapy to standard of care (SOC) is unknown. Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin therapy among patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Design, Setting, and Participants: This Markov cohort cost-effectiveness model used estimates of therapy effectiveness, transition probabilities, and utilities from the DAPA-HF trial and other published literature. Costs were derived from published sources. Patients with HFrEF included subgroups based on diabetes status and health status impairment due to heart failure. We compiled parameters from the literature including DAPA-HF, on which our model is based, and many other sources from December 2019 to February 27, 2021. We performed our analysis in February 2021. Exposures: Dapagliflozin or SOC. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalizations for heart failure, life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs, and the cost per QALY gained (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio). Results: In the model, dapagliflozin therapy yielded a mean of 0.78 additional life-years and 0.46 additional QALYs compared with SOC at an incremental cost of $38 212, resulting in a cost per QALY gained of $83 650. The cost per QALY was similar for patients with or without diabetes and for patients with mild or moderate impairment of health status due to heart failure. The cost-effectiveness was most sensitive to estimates of the effect on mortality and duration of therapy effectiveness. If the cost of dapagliflozin decreased from $474 to $270 (43% decline), the cost per QALY gained would drop below $50 000. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that dapagliflozin provides intermediate value compared with SOC, based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association benchmarks. Additional data regarding the magnitude of mortality reduction would improve the precision of cost-effectiveness estimates.

Short-term cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Oral semaglutide is the first orally administered glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) approved by the FDA. Clinical trials found that oral semaglutide 14 mg had a greater reduction in hemoglobin A1c (A1c) compared with empagliflozin 25 mg and sitagliptin 100 mg and was noninferior to liraglutide 1.8 mg. However, US cost-effectiveness data for oral semaglutide are limited and do not consider the costs of adverse events. OBJECTIVE: To assess the short-term cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide compared with empagliflozin, sitagliptin, and liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A decision analysis over a 52-week time horizon was used to evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide vs empagliflozin, sitagliptin, and liraglutide from a US health care payer's perspective. Data on efficacy, adverse events, and discontinuation were derived from 52-week data from phase 3, head-to-head clinical trials (PIONEER 2, 3, and 4). Costs included drug and administration cost and treatment of gastrointestinal adverse events. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated as the difference in cost over the difference in A1c reduction between oral semaglutide and comparators. RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, 52-week treatment costs with oral semaglutide were $2,660 and $3,104 higher and $2,337 less than empagliflozin, sitagliptin, and liraglutide, respectively. Incremental (greater) A1c reductions were seen with oral semaglutide at 0.40%, 0.50%, and 0.30% vs empagliflozin, sitagliptin, and liraglutide, respectively. ICERs per 1% reduction in A1c for oral semaglutide were $6,650 and $6,207 vs empagliflozin and sitagliptin, respectively. Oral semaglutide was dominant vs liraglutide (ICER of -$7,790). CONCLUSIONS: Oral semaglutide was dominant relative to liraglutide, offering a cost-saving GLP-1RA oral alternative. While there is not a recognized willingness-to-pay threshold for a 1% reduction in A1c, oral semaglutide may be cost-effective relative to empagliflozin and sitagliptin if a decision maker's willingness-to-pay threshold exceeds $6,650 and $6,207, respectively. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.