Cost-effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine in Adults with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Marc Evans, Barrie Chubb, Jens Gundgaard, Marc Evans, Barrie Chubb, Jens Gundgaard

Abstract

Introduction: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine U100 (IGlar U100) and new-to-market basal insulin analogues in patients with diabetes in order to aid decision-making in a complex basal insulin market.

Methods: A simple, short-term model was used to evaluate the costs and effects of treatment with IDeg versus IGlar U100 over a 12-month period in patients with type 1 (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM) from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. New-to-market basal insulin analogues were evaluated in scenario analyses.

Results: IDeg is dominant (more effective and less costly) versus IGlar U100 in patients with T1DM and patients with T2DM on a basal-only therapy regimen (T2DMBOT), and is cost-effective versus IGlar U100 in patients with T2DM on a basal-bolus regimen (T2DMB/B). In T1DM, lower costs are primarily driven by lower insulin costs, as a result of a lower daily dose of IDeg. In T2DMBOT, lower overall costs with IDeg are driven by lower costs of severe hypoglycaemic events due to the significant reduction in number of events with IDeg versus IGlar U100. Improvements in clinical outcomes in all three patient groups are a result of the reduced incidence of hypoglycaemic events. Sensitivity analyses demonstrate that the results are robust. Scenario analyses versus two new-to-market basal insulin analogues indicate that in patients with T1DM and T2DMBOT, IDeg is likely to be highly cost-effective versus IGlar biosimilar Abasaglar® and dominant versus IGlar U300 (Toujeo®). In T2DMB/B, IDeg is likely to be cost-effective versus both comparators, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) below the accepted threshold.

Conclusion: IDeg is a cost-effective alternative to IGlar U100 for patients with diabetes in the UK, and it also likely to be cost-effective versus two new-to-market basal insulin analogues.

Keywords: Cost-effective; Diabetes; Hypoglycaemia; ICER; Insulin analogue; Insulin degludec; QALY.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Overview of the cost-effectiveness model
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
PSA results: cost-effectiveness scatterplots and acceptability curves

References

    1. Zhang P, Zhang X, Brown J, et al. Global healthcare expenditure on diabetes for 2010 and 2030. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2010;87:293–301. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2010.01.026.
    1. Hex N, Bartlett C, Wright D, Taylor M, Varley D. Estimating the current and future costs of type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the UK, including direct health costs and indirect societal and productivity costs. Diabet Med. 2012;29:855–62.
    1. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Matthews DR, Neil HA. 10-year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1577–1589. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0806470.
    1. Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JY, et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2643–2653. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa052187.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). NICE Guideline 17. Type 1 diabetes in adults: diagnosis and management. 2015. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: a patient-centered approach: update to a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:140–149. doi: 10.2337/dc14-2441.
    1. NHS Health, Social Care Information Centre. Quality and outcomes framework for diabetes 2013–14. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Davies M, Gagliardino J, Gray L, Khunti K, Mohan V, Hughes R. Real-world factors affecting adherence to insulin therapy in patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review. Diabet Med. 2013;30:512–24.
    1. Peyrot M, Rubin RR, Lauritzen T, et al. Resistance to insulin therapy among patients and providers: results of the cross-national Diabetes Attitudes, Wishes, and Needs (DAWN) study. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:2673–2679. doi: 10.2337/diacare.28.11.2673.
    1. Heise T, Nosek L, Bottcher SG, Hastrup H, Haahr H. Ultra-long-acting insulin degludec has a flat and stable glucose-lowering effect in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:944–950. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01638.x.
    1. Haahr H, Heise T. A review of the pharmacological properties of insulin degludec and their clinical relevance. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2014;53:787–800. doi: 10.1007/s40262-014-0165-y.
    1. Heise T, Hermanski L, Nosek L, Feldman A, Rasmussen S, Haahr H. Insulin degludec: four times lower pharmacodynamic variability than insulin glargine under steady-state conditions in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2012;14:859–864. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01627.x.
    1. Ratner R, Gough SC, Mathieu C, et al. Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in type 2 and type 1 diabetes: a pre-planned meta-analysis of phase 3 trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013;15:175–184. doi: 10.1111/dom.12032.
    1. Vora J, Christensen T, Rana A, Bain SC. Insulin degludec versus insulin glargine in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of endpoints in phase 3a trials. Diabetes Ther. 2014;5:435–446. doi: 10.1007/s13300-014-0076-9.
    1. Evans M, McEwan P, Foos V. Insulin degludec early clinical experience: does the promise from the clinical trials translate into clinical practice-a case-based evaluation. J Med Econ. 2015;18:96–105. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2014.975234.
    1. Sassi F. Calculating QALYs, comparing QALY and DALY calculations. Health Policy Plan. 2006;21:402–408. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czl018.
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Measuring effectiveness and cost-effectiveness: the QALY. 2010. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Ericsson A, Pollock RF, Hunt B, Valentine WJ. Evaluation of the cost-utility of insulin degludec vs insulin glargine in Sweden. J Med Econ. 2013;16:1442–1452. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.852099.
    1. Evans M, Wolden M, Gundgaard J, Chubb B, Christensen T. Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine for patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin—from the UK health care cost perspective. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2014;16:366–375. doi: 10.1111/dom.12250.
    1. Evans M, Wolden M, Gundgaard J, Chubb B, Christensen T. Cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in a basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus in the UK. J Med Econ. 2015;18:56–68. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2014.971160.
    1. The Forum for Injection Technique (FIT). Diabetes care in the UK: the first UK injection technique recommendations. 2nd Edition. 2011. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Allbright E, Desmond R, Bell D. Efficacy of conversion from bedtime NPH insulin injection to once- or twice-daily injections of insulin glargine in type 1 diabetic patients using basal/bolus therapy. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:632–633. doi: 10.2337/diacare.27.2.632.
    1. Garg SK, Gottlieb PA, Hisatomi ME, et al. Improved glycemic control without an increase in severe hypoglycemic episodes in intensively treated patients with type 1 diabetes receiving morning, evening, or split dose insulin glargine. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2004;66:49–56. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2004.02.008.
    1. Dhatariya KK, Yeong J. Improved glycaemic control for patients on a twice daily dosing regimen of insulin glargine compared to those on a once daily dosing regimen. Poster presentation at European Association for the Study of Diabetes, Stockholm 2010. Diabetologia. 2010;53:S390.
    1. UK Hypoglycaemia Study Group Risk of hypoglycaemia in types 1 and 2 diabetes: effects of treatment modalities and their duration. Diabetologia. 2007;50:1140–1147. doi: 10.1007/s00125-007-0599-y.
    1. Evans M, Khunti K, Mamdani M, et al. Health-related quality of life associated with daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemic events: a time trade-off survey in five countries. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:90. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-90.
    1. Haymarket Media Group. Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS). 2016. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Hammer M, Lammert M, Mejias SM, Kern W, Frier BM. Costs of managing severe hypoglycaemia in three European countries. J Med Econ. 2009;12:281–290. doi: 10.3111/13696990903336597.
    1. Chubb B, Tikkanen C. The cost of non-severe hypoglycaemia In Europe. Value Health. 2015;18:A611. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.09.2118.
    1. Currie CJ, Morgan CL, Poole CD, Sharplin P, Lammert M, McEwan P. Multivariate models of health-related utility and the fear of hypoglycaemia in people with diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:1523–1534. doi: 10.1185/030079906X115757.
    1. Evans M, Jensen HH, Bogelund M, Gundgaard J, Chubb B, Khunti K. Flexible insulin dosing improves health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL): a time trade-off survey. J Med Econ. 2013;16:1357–1365. doi: 10.3111/13696998.2013.846262.
    1. Boye KS, Matza LS, Walter KN, Van Brunt K, Palsgrove AC, Tynan A. Utilities and disutilities for attributes of injectable treatments for type 2 diabetes. Eur J Health Econ. 2011;12:219–230. doi: 10.1007/s10198-010-0224-8.
    1. European Commission. What you need to know about biosimilar medicinal products. A consensus information document. 2013. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. European Medicines Agency. Toujeo®: summary of product characteristics. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. European Medicines Agency. Toujeo® EPAR. 2015. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Home PD, Bergenstal RM, Bolli GB, et al. New insulin glargine 300 units/mL versus glargine 100 units/mL in people with type 1 diabetes: a randomized, phase 3a, open-label clinical trial (edition 4). Diabetes Care. 2015;38:2217–25.
    1. Bolli GB, Riddle MC, Bergenstal RM, et al. New insulin glargine 300 U/ml compared with glargine 100 U/ml in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes on oral glucose-lowering drugs: a randomized controlled trial (edition 3) Diabetes Obes Metab. 2015;17:386–394. doi: 10.1111/dom.12438.
    1. Riddle MC, Bolli GB, Ziemen M, et al. New insulin glargine 300 units/mL versus glargine 100 units/mL in people with type 2 diabetes using basal and mealtime insulin: glucose control and hypoglycemia in a 6-month randomized controlled trial (edition 1) Diabetes Care. 2014;37:2755–2762. doi: 10.2337/dc14-0991.
    1. Dornhorst A, Luddeke HJ, Sreenan S, et al. Safety and efficacy of insulin detemir in clinical practice: 14-week follow-up data from type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients in the PREDICTIVE European cohort. Int J Clin Pract. 2007;61:523–528. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01316.x.
    1. Frier BM, Jensen MM, Chubb BD. Hypoglycaemia in adults with insulin-treated diabetes in the UK: self-reported frequency and effects. Diabet Med. 2016;33(8):1125–32.
    1. Scottish Medicines Consortium. SMC advice no. 856/13. Insulin degludec (Tresiba®) 100units/mL solution for injection in pre-filled pen or cartridge and 200 units/mL solution for injection in pre-filled pen. 2016. . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. AWMSG. Final appraisal recommendation advice no: 2816. Insulin degludec (Tresiba®) 100 units/ml and 200 units/ml solution for injection in prefilled pen (FlexTouch®) or 100 units/ml solution for injection in cartridge (Penfill®). . Accessed 23 Dec 2016.
    1. Philis-Tsimikas A, Brod M, Niemeyer M, Ocampo Francisco AM, Rothman J. Insulin degludec once-daily in type 2 diabetes: simple or step-wise titration (begin: once simple use) Adv Ther. 2013;30:607–622. doi: 10.1007/s12325-013-0036-1.
    1. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, et al. The CORE Diabetes Model: projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision-making. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):S5–S26. doi: 10.1185/030079904X1980.
    1. Gundgaard J, Landstedt-Hallin L, Ericsson Å, Ellfors-Zetterlund S. Cost-effectiveness of switching to Tresiba® from other basal insulins: evidence from Swedish real-world data. Oral presentation #11. In EASD 52nd Annual Meeting, Munich, Germany; September 12–16, 2016, p. 12–16.
    1. Lane W, Bailey TS, Gerety G, et al. SWITCH 1: reduced hypoglycemia with insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine (IGlar), both U100, in patients with T1D at high risk of hypoglycemia: a randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial. 87-LB. Presented at the ADA 76th Annual Scientific Sessions, New Orleans, LA, USA; June 10–14, 2016, p. 10–14.
    1. Wysham C, Bhargava A, Chaykin L, et al. SWITCH 2: reduced hypoglycemia with insulin degludec (IDeg) versus insulin glargine (IGlar), both U100, in patients with T2D at high risk of hypoglycemia: a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial. 90-LB. Presented at the ADA 76th Annual Scientific Sessions, New Orleans, LA, USA; June 10–14, 2016, p. 10–14.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel