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 sotagliflozin for the treatment of patients with diabetes and recent worsening heart failure.

Aim: To assesses the cost-effectiveness of sotagliflozin for the treatment of patients hospitalized with heart failure and comorbid diabetes. Materials & methods: A de novo cost-effectiveness model with a Markov structure was created for patients hospitalized for heart failure with comorbid diabetes. Outcomes of interest included hospital readmissions, emergency department visits and all-cause mortality measured over a 30-year time horizon. Baseline event frequencies were derived from published real-world data studies; sotagliflozin's efficacy was estimated from SOLOIST-WHF. Health benefits were calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs included pharmaceutical costs, rehospitalization, emergency room visits and adverse events. Economic value was measured using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: Sotagliflozin use decreased annualized rehospitalization rates by 34.5% (0.228 vs 0.348, difference: -0.120), annualized emergency department visits by 40.0% (0.091 vs 0.153, difference: -0.061) and annualized mortality by 18.0% (0.298 vs 0.363, difference: -0.065) relative to standard of care, resulting in a net gain in QAYs of 0.425 for sotagliflozin versus standard of care. Incremental costs using sotagliflozin increased by $19,374 over a 30-year time horizon of the patient, driven largely by increased pharmaceutical cost. Estimated ICER for sotagliflozin relative to standard of care was $45,596 per QALY. Conclusion: Sotagliflozin is a cost-effective addition to standard of care for patients hospitalized with heart failure and comorbid diabetes.

Comparing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of sulfonylureas and newer diabetes drugs as second-line therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness profiles of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1-RA), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) compared with sulfonylureas and glinides (SU). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Population-based retrospective cohort study based on linked regional healthcare utilization databases. The cohort included all residents in Lombardy aged ≥40 years, treated with metformin in 2014, who started a second-line treatment between 2015 and 2018 with SU, GLP-1-RA, SGLT2i, or DPP-4i. For each cohort member who started SU, one patient who began other second-line treatments was randomly selected and matched for sex, age, Multisource Comorbidity Score, and previous duration of metformin treatment. Cohort members were followed up until December 31, 2022. The association between second-line treatment and clinical outcomes was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and compared between newer diabetes drugs and SU. RESULTS: Overall, 22 867 patients with diabetes were included in the cohort, among which 10 577, 8125, 2893 and 1272 started a second-line treatment with SU, DPP-4i, SGLT2i and GLP-1-RA, respectively. Among these, 1208 patients for each group were included in the matched cohort. As compared with SU, those treated with DPP-4i, SGLT2i and GLP-1-RA were associated to a risk reduction for hospitalization for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) of 22% (95% CI 3% to 37%), 29% (95% CI 12% to 44%) and 41% (95% CI 26% to 53%), respectively. The ICER values indicated an average gain of €96.2 and €75.7 each month free from MACE for patients on DPP-4i and SGLT2i, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Newer diabetes drugs are more effective and cost-effective second-line options for the treatment of type 2 diabetes than SUs.

Cost-Effectiveness of Newer Pharmacologic Treatments in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness Studies for the American College of Physicians.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, costs of antidiabetes medications exceed $327 billion. PURPOSE: To systematically review cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of newer antidiabetes medications for type 2 diabetes. DATA SOURCES: Bibliographic databases from 1 January 2010 through 13 July 2023, limited to English. STUDY SELECTION: Nonindustry-funded CEAs, done from a U.S. perspective that estimated cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for newer antidiabetic medications. Two reviewers screened the literature; disagreements were resolved with a third reviewer. DATA EXTRACTION: Cost-effectiveness analyses were reviewed for treatment comparisons, model inputs, and outcomes. Risk of bias (RoB) of the CEAs was assessed using Drummond criteria and certainty of evidence (CoE) was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluations). Certainty of evidence was determined using cost per QALY thresholds predetermined by the American College of Physicians Clinical Guidelines Committee; low (>$150 000), intermediate ($50 to $150 000), or high (<$50 000) value per QALY compared with the alternative. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nine CEAs were eligible (2 low, 1 high, and 6 some concerns RoB), evaluating glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists (GLP1a), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide agonist (GIP/GLP1a), and insulin. Comparators were metformin, sulfonylureas, neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, and others. Compared with metformin, GLP1a and SGLT2i are low value as first-line therapy (high CoE) but may be of intermediate value when added to metformin or background therapy compared with adding nothing (low CoE). Insulin analogues may be similarly effective but more expensive than NPH insulin (low CoE). The GIP/GLP1a value is uncertain (insufficient CoE). LIMITATIONS: Cost-effectiveness analyses varied in methodological approach, assumptions, and drug comparisons. Risk of bias and GRADE method for CEAs are not well established. CONCLUSION: Glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists and SGLT2i are of low value as first-line therapy but may be of intermediate value when added to metformin or other background therapy compared with adding nothing. Other drugs and comparisons are of low or uncertain value. Results are sensitive to drug effectiveness and cost assumptions. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42022382315).

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.

Cost-Effectiveness of New Quadruple Therapy Compared With Standard Treatment for Patients With Heart Failure in China.

ABSTRACT: This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of the new quadruple therapy regimen of adding sodium-glucose-linked transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, with standard treatment for patients with heart failure (HF) in China. From the payer's perspective, the dates of cardiovascular event recurrences were extracted from a meta-analysis including 6 trials, combined with the treatment cost for patients with HF in China to construct a Markov model. The outcomes included per capita medical costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, using quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) data. Single-factor, probability sensitivity analysis, and scenario analysis were used to explore the potential uncertainties of the model. The per capita costs of the new quadruple therapy regimen and standard treatment were $87441.26 and $87087.54, respectively. The new regimen was associated with a mean of 21.44 QALYs gained, compared with 18.60 QALYs gained with the standard treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $124.03 per QALY gained. The sensitivity analysis revealed that changes in the parameters within the set range did not affect the model results. In China, compared with standard treatment, the new quadruple therapy regimen with SGLT2 inhibitors reduce the frequency of cardiovascular events among patients with HF, and it has economic advantages.

The health and budget impact of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: Type-2 Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) increases both the patient risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and renal outcomes, such as chronic kidney disease (CKD). Recent clinical trials of the glucose-lowering drug-class of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have shown benefits in preventing CVD events and progression of CKD, leading to an update of the Dutch T2DM treatment guideline for patients at risk. The aim of this study is to assess the health and economic impact of the guideline-recommended utilization of SGLT2is in the Netherlands. METHODS: The patient population at risk was determined by multiplying Dutch T2DM prevalence rates with the total numbers of inhabitants of the Netherlands in 2020. Subsequently, two analyses, comparing a treatment setting before and after implementation of the new guideline for SGLT2is, were conducted. Clinical and adverse event rates in both settings as well as direct healthcare costs were sourced from the literature. Total costs were calculated by multiplying disease prevalence, event rates and costs associated to outcomes. One-time disutilities per event were included to estimate the health impact. The potential health and economic impact of implementing the updated guideline was calculated. RESULTS: Using a 5-year time horizon, the guideline-suggested utilization of SGLT2is resulted in a health impact equal to 4835 quality adjusted life years gained (0.0031 per patient per year) and €461 million cost-savings. The costs of treatment with SGLT2is were €813 million. Hence the net budget impact was €352 million for the total Dutch T2DM population, which translated to €0,57 per patient per day. CONCLUSION: SGLT2is offer an option to reduce the number of CVD and CKD related events and associated healthcare costs and health losses in the Netherlands. Further research is needed to include the benefits of improved T2DM management options from a broader societal perspective.HighlightsThe glucose-lowering drug-class of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) has shown benefits in preventing cardiovascular events and progression of kidney disease in patients with type-2 diabetes leading to a revision of the respective Dutch treatment guideline.The 5-year budget impact of the adoption of SGLT2is in the new treatment guideline was equal to €352 million or €0.57 per patient per day, with a total of 4385 quality adjusted life years gained.The introduction of SGLT2is for Dutch type-2 diabetes patients has the potential to substantially reduce the number of cardiovascular as well as renal disease events and related healthcare costs while also delivering a health benefit.

New Therapeutic Horizons in Chronic Kidney Disease: The Role of SGLT2 Inhibitors in Clinical Practice.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a serious, progressive condition associated with significant patient morbidity. Hypertension control and use of renin-angiotensin system blockers are the cornerstones of treatment for CKD. However, even with these treatment strategies, many individuals will progress towards kidney failure. Recently, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor clinical trials with primary renal endpoints have firmly established SGLT2 inhibition, in addition to standard of care, as an effective strategy to slow down the progression of CKD and reduce some of its associated complications. The emergence of this new clinical evidence supports the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in the management of CKD in people with and without diabetes. As licensing and guidelines for SGLT2 inhibitors are updated, there is a need to adapt CKD treatment pathways and for this class of drugs to be included as part of standard care for CKD management. In this article, we have used consensus opinion alongside the available evidence to provide support for the healthcare community involved in CKD management, regarding the role of SGLT2 inhibitors in clinical practice. By highlighting appropriate prescribing and practical considerations, we aim to encourage greater and safe use of SGLT2 inhibitors for people with CKD, both with and without diabetes.

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.

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

Importance: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction produces substantial morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Dapagliflozin is the first sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor approved for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Objective: To examine the cost-effectiveness of adding dapagliflozin to guideline-directed medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in patients with or without diabetes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation developed and used a Markov cohort model that compared dapagliflozin and guideline-directed medical therapy with guideline-directed medical therapy alone in a hypothetical cohort of US adults with similar clinical characteristics as participants of the Dapagliflozin in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction (DAPA-HF) trial. Dapagliflozin was assumed to cost $4192 annually. Nonparametric modeling was used to estimate long-term survival. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses examined the impact of parameter uncertainty. Data were analyzed between September 2019 and January 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in 2020 US dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Results: The simulated cohort had a starting age of 66 years, and 41.8% had diabetes at baseline. Median (interquartile range) survival in the guideline-directed medical therapy arm was 6.8 (3.5-11.3) years. Dapagliflozin was projected to add 0.63 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 0.25-1.15) QALYs at an incremental lifetime cost of $42 800 (95% UI, $37 100-$50 300), for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $68 300 per QALY gained (95% UI, $54 600-$117 600 per QALY gained; cost-effective in 94% of probabilistic simulations at a threshold of $100 000 per QALY gained). Findings were similar in individuals with or without diabetes but were sensitive to drug cost. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, adding dapagliflozin to guideline-directed medical therapy was projected to improve long-term clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and be cost-effective at current US prices. Scalable strategies for improving uptake of dapagliflozin may improve long-term outcomes in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Optimising the Heart Failure Treatment Pathway: The Role of SGLT2 Inhibitors.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were first developed as glucose-lowering therapies for the treatment of diabetes. However, these drugs have now been recognised to prevent worsening heart-failure events, improve health-related quality of life, and reduce mortality in people with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), including those both with and without diabetes. Despite robust clinical trial data demonstrating favourable outcomes with SGLT2 inhibitors for patients with HFrEF, there is a lack of familiarity with the HF indication for these drugs, which have been the remit of diabetologists to date. In this article we use consensus expert opinion alongside the available evidence and label indication to provide support for the healthcare community treating people with HF regarding positioning of SGLT2 inhibitors within the treatment pathway. By highlighting appropriate prescribing and practical considerations, we hope to encourage greater, and safe, use of SGLT2 inhibitors in this population.

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.

Usefulness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for Primary Prevention of Heart Failure in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

The sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) empagliflozin, canagliflozin, and dapagliflozin reduce the risk of heart failure (HF) events in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) at high risk for HF. Differences in HF outcomes between SGLT2i were demonstrated in a recent-published meta-analysis. Nevertheless, comparative cost-effectiveness analyses of SGLT2i provided for this indication have not been published yet. Therefore, we aimed to provide a preceding economic comparison of the costs required for improving HF outcomes by these three SGLT2i. The primary outcome was the cost needed to treat (CNT) to prevent one event of hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular mortality. CNT is calculated by multiplying the annualized number needed to treat to prevent one event by the annual cost of therapy. Clinical outcome data were extracted from pre-specified cohorts of HF-naïve patients in the pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Costs of interventions were estimated as 75% of the US National Average Drug Acquisition Cost listing. Sensitivity analysis was performed to mitigate differences between the RCT's populations. We figured the CNT for the primary prevention of HF events in DM patients to be $542,328 ($409,044-$905,412) for empagliflozin, $2,347,488 ($1,066,208-∞) for canagliflozin and $2,128,374 ($1,204,740-$48,140,518) for dapagliflozin. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the cost benefit of empagliflozin. Our findings suggest that between the available SGLT2i, the cost of primary prevention of HF in patients with DM at high risk for HF is lowest with empagliflozin. These findings may help choose an SGLT2i until head-to-head RCTs, and comprehensive cost-effective analyses for this indication are available.

A real-world comparison of cardiovascular, medical and costs outcomes in new users of SGLT2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 agonists.

AIMS: To compare SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists on cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, treatment persistence/discontinuation, healthcare utilization and costs. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized medical and pharmacy claims to identify new SGLT2 inhibitor or GLP-1 agonist users from January 2015 to June 2017. A total of 5,507 patients were included in each treatment group after 1:1 propensity score matching. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare CV outcomes and treatment discontinuation. Healthcare utilization and costs were compared using Wilcoxon signed rank test. RESULTS: No differences in the primary composite CV outcome or secondary CV outcome were observed. Patients using GLP-1 agonists were more likely to discontinue treatment (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.10-1.21) and more likely to have an inpatient hospitalization (14.4% vs. 11.9%, P < 0.001) or emergency department visit (27.4% vs. 23.5%, P < 0.001) compared to patients on SGLT2 inhibitors. The average per-person per-month cost difference was +$179 for total cost (P < 0.001), +$70 for medical cost (P < 0.001) and +$108 for pharmacy cost (P < 0.001) for GLP-1 agonists compared to SGLT2 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in composite CV outcomes were not established. However, other findings that favored SGLT2 inhibitors should be weighed against the known risks associated with this therapeutic class.

Health care utilization and costs associated with switching from DPP-4i to GLP-1RA or SGLT2i: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Because of improved clinical outcomes, recent American Diabetes Association guidelines recommend the use of newer antidiabetic agents-glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i)-by those with cardiovascular disease. It is unclear, however, how switching to these newer agents affects health care utilization and costs. OBJECTIVE: To compare health care utilization and costs between users of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) who switch to GLP-1RA or SGLT2i and nonswitchers. METHODS: We used claims data from a large pharmacy benefit manager. Patients included were commercially insured adults with type 2 diabetes and a prescription claim for DPP-4i in 2016 or 2017. Using propensity score methods, we matched patients who switched to SGLT2i or GLP-1RA with those who remained on DPP-4i. Among matched samples, we conducted multivariable negative binomial regression to examine differences in the incidence of inpatient and emergency room (ER) visits and generalized linear regression to examine differences in health care costs. RESULTS: Among 47,953 patients who used DPP-4i in 2016 and 2017, 507 switched to SGLT2i and 808 switched to GLP-1RA. Propensity score matching of 1:6 resulted in 3,042 nonswitchers/507 switchers for the SGLT2i cohort and 4,848 nonswitchers/808 switchers for the GLP-1RA cohort. Switchers to SGLT2i experienced a 39% reduction (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.38-0.96), and GLP-1RA switchers experienced a 29% reduction (IRR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.52-0.97) in inpatient hospitalizations. ER visit rates did not differ significantly between switchers and nonswitchers. Switchers to SGLT2i did not have statistically significant differences in medical or pharmacy costs compared with DPP-4i users, while switchers to GLP-1RA had significantly higher total pharmacy costs (adjusted difference of $2,453.10, 95% CI = $1,837.20-$3,069.00). CONCLUSIONS: Switching from DPP-4i to GLP-1RA or SGLT2i was associated with fewer hospitalizations; however, higher pharmacy costs may outweigh savings from reduced hospitalizations, especially for GLP-1RAs. As newer diabetes guidelines steer specific populations to these drug classes, it is important to optimize drug pricing to realize their true value. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Neilson, Good, Swart, and Huang are employees of UPMC Center for Value-Based Pharmacy Initiatives and High-Value Care. Parekh reports employment at UPMC until July 2019. Munshi and Henderson are employed by Express Scripts. Newman has no disclosures to report.

Penetration rates of new pharmaceutical products in Europe: A comparative study of several classes recently launched in type-2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Different countries have their own systems for evaluating new medicines, and they make decisions as to when and how each new medicine is adopted. PURPOSE: To compare the rate of uptake of new diabetes medicines (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors [DPP-4Is], glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists [GLP1-RAs], and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors [SGLT2Is]) in the five most populated European countries. METHODS: The monthly volume of sales of antidiabetic drugs was extracted for each country from the IQVIA™ MIDAS® database for the period 2007 to 2016 and the defined daily doses (DDDs) were calculated. For each new drug, market shares were expressed as a percentage of the total market of non-insulin antidiabetic agents. RESULTS: Sharp differences were observed between the countries. Overall, the highest and fastest rates of uptake were seen for Germany and Spain, compared to lower rates for the UK and Italy. This was especially marked for DPP-4Is, where the market share reached over 30% of non-insulin antidiabetic drugs in Germany and Spain, compared to around 10% in the UK and Italy. In France, there was an initial rapid uptake, which stabilized at around 20% after three years. Rates of uptake were lower for the other drugs, with the GLP1-RAs reaching a market share of 2.5-4.5% in Germany, Spain and France, compared to less than 2.5% in the UK and Italy. The SGLT2Is reached a market share of 5-8% in Spain and Germany, compared to less than 4% in the UK and Italy, and they were not launched at all in France in March 2020. CONCLUSION: The differences in the uptake of new antidiabetic drugs may reflect different methods for assessing and introducing new medicines, as well as cultural factors. The uptake of the new medicines would appear to be more cautious in the UK and Italy, perhaps due to concerns about cost-effectiveness, whereas in Germany and Spain, and possibly also France, a new medicine's potential benefits may be prioritized.

Coverage, Formulary Restrictions, and Affordability of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors by US Insurance Plan Types.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the stipulations of coverage under commercial, health insurance exchange, Veterans Affairs, Medicare, Medicaid, or other insurance for canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, empagliflozin, and ertugliflozin.