Article Sidebar
Views PDF: 313
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF INSULIN DEGLUDEC VERSUS INSULIN GLARGINE IN DIABETES MANAGEMENT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Insulin degludec and insulin glargine are basal, long-acting insulin analogs which have a flat and stable action profile. Cost-effectiveness analysis of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in diabetes management was performed in many countries. Objectives: Systematic review highlighted the crucial findings of cost-effectiveness studies relating to insulin degludec in comparison to insulin glargine in diabetes management. Materials and methods: This review implemented searching and extraction of data on target population, perspectives, model characteristics, methodology of design, costs, the Willingness to pay and Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio from cost-effectiveness analyses of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in diabetes management published during the period of 2016-2021. Results: Of the 12 identified articles in analyzing cost-effectiveness, there were 7 articles performed on both type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus, the most common perspective was the national healthcare system, accounting for 58.3%. The majority of studies showed that insulin degludec was cost-effective compared with insulin glargine, with ICER/QALY values widely varying (max ICER: 665.310 USD/QALY). Conclusion: These findings suggested insulin degludec as a cost-effective alternative to insulin glargine in the treatment of diabetes patients without optimal glycemic control.
Article Details
Keywords
Cost-effectiveness analysis, diabetes, insulin degludec, insulin glargine, systematic review
References
2. American Diabetes Association (2018), “Economic Costs of Diabetes in the U.S. in 2017”, Diabetes Care. 41 (Issue), pp.917-928.
3. International Diabetes Federation (IDF) (2021), The IDF Diabetes Atlas 10th Edition.
4. Cheng H, Wan X, Ma J, Wu B (2019), “Cost-effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine in Insulin-naive Chinese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes”, Clinical Therapeutics, 41(3),pp.445-455.e4.
5. Evans M, Chubb B, Gundgaard J (2017), “Cost-effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine in Adults with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus”, Diabetes Ther, 8(2), pp.275-291.
6. Evans M, Mehta R, Gundgaard J, Chubb B (2018), “Cost-Effectiveness of Insulin Degludec vs. Insulin Glargine U100 in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a UK Setting”, Diabetes Ther,9(5), pp.1919-1930.
7. Evans M, Moes RGJ, Pedersen KS, Gundgaard J, Pieber TR (2020), “Cost-Effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U300 in the Netherlands: Evidence From a Randomised Controlled Trial”, Advances in Therapy, 37(5), pp.2413-2426.
8. Lalić N, Russel-Szymczyk M, Culic M, Tikkanen CK, Chubb B (2018), “Cost-Effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Serbia”, Diabetes Therapy, 9(3), pp.1201-1216.
9. Liu W, Yang X, Huang J (2018), “Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec versus Insulin Glargine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Fifteen Clinical Trials”, International Journal of Endocrinology, pp.8726046.
10.Marso SP, McGuire DK, Zinman B, Poulter NR, Emerson SS, et al. (2017), “Efficacy and Safety of Degludec versus Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes”, N Engl J Med, 377(8), pp.723-732.
11.Mezquita-Raya P, Darbà J, Ascanio M, Ramírez de Arellano A (2017), “Cost-effectiveness analysis of insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine u100 for the management of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus - from the Spanish National Health System perspective”, Expert
Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 17(6), pp.587-595.
12.Pollock RF, Tikkanen CK (2017), “A short-term cost-utility analysis of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in Denmark”, Journal of Medical Economics, 20(3), pp.213-220.
14.Pollock RF, Heller S, Pieber TR, Woo V, Gundgaard J, et al. (2019), “Short-term cost-utility of degludec versus glargine U100 for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular events: A Canadian setting (DEVOTE 9)”, Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, 21(7), pp. 1706-1714.
15.Russel-Szymczyk M, Valov V, Savova A, Manova M (2019), “Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec versus insulin glargine U100 in adults with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in Bulgaria”, BMC Endocr Disord, 19(1), pp.132.
16.Zhang XW, Zhang XL, Xu B, Kang LN (2018), “Comparative safety and efficacy of insulin degludec with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials”, Acta Diabetol, 55(5), pp.429-441.