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

A Kansal, O S Reifsnider, I Proskorovsky, Y Zheng, E Pfarr, J T George, P Kandaswamy, A Ruffolo, A Kansal, O S Reifsnider, I Proskorovsky, Y Zheng, E Pfarr, J T George, P Kandaswamy, A Ruffolo

Abstract

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).

© 2019 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic of the simulation flow.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Tornado diagram. CV, cardiovascular; HF, heart failure; MI, myocardial infarction; PAD, peripheral artery disease; QALY, quality‐adjusted life years.

References

    1. Diabetes mellitus: a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease . A joint editorial statement by the American Diabetes Association; The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; The Juvenile Diabetes Foundation International; The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; and The American Heart Association. Circulation 1999; 100: 1132–1133.
    1. American Heart Association . Cardiovascular Disease and Diabetes, 2015. Available at Last accessed 12 August 2016.
    1. Grundy SM, Benjamin IJ, Burke GL, Chait A, Eckel RH, Howard BV et al Diabetes and cardiovascular disease: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation 1999; 100: 1134–1146.
    1. American Diabetes Association . Standards of medical care in diabetes – 2016. Diabetes Care 2016; 39: S1–S112.
    1. Tandon N, Ali MK, Narayan KM. Pharmacologic prevention of microvascular and macrovascular complications in diabetes mellitus: implications of the results of recent clinical trials in type 2 diabetes. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs 2012; 12: 7–22.
    1. Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, Fitchett D, Bluhmki E, Hantel S et al Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 2117–2128.
    1. Kansal AR, Zheng Y, Palencia R, Ruffolo A, Hass B, Sorensen SV. Modeling hard clinical end‐point data in economic analyses. J Med Econ 2013; 16: 1327–1343.
    1. Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS) . MIMS Drug Database. Available at Last accessed 5 April 2019.
    1. Alva ML, Gray A, Mihaylova B, Leal J, Holman RR. The impact of diabetes‐related complications on healthcare costs: new results from the UKPDS (UKPDS 84). Diabet Med 2015; 32: 459–466.
    1. Clarke P, Gray A, Legood R, Briggs A, Holman R. The impact of diabetes‐related complications on healthcare costs: results from the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS Study No. 65). Diabet Med 2003; 20: 442–450.
    1. Ward A, Alvarez P, Vo L, Martin S. Direct medical costs of complications of diabetes in the United States: estimates for event‐year and annual state costs (USD 2012). J Med Econ 2014; 17: 176–183.
    1. Cassar K. Intermittent claudication. BMJ 2006; 333: 1002–1005.
    1. Gordois A, Scuffham P, Shearer A, Oglesby A. The health care costs of diabetic nephropathy in the United States and the United Kingdom. J Diabetes Complicat 2004; 18: 18–26.
    1. Kent S, Schlackow I, Lozano‐Kuhne J, Reith C, Emberson J, Haynes R et al What is the impact of chronic kidney disease stage and cardiovascular disease on the annual cost of hospital care in moderate‐to‐severe kidney disease? BMC Nephrol 2015; 16: 65.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) . Empagliflozin in Combination Therapy for Treating Type 2 Diabetes. Technology appraisal guidance 336. Available at Last accessed 5 April 2019.
    1. Sullivan PW, Ghushchyan VH. EQ‐5D scores for diabetes‐related comorbidities. Value Health 2016; 19: 1002–1008.
    1. Lindgren P, Graff J, Olsson AG, Pedersen TJ, Jonsson B; Ideal Trial Investigators . Cost‐effectiveness of high‐dose atorvastatin compared with regular dose simvastatin. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 1448–1453.
    1. Office for National Statistics . National Life Tables, United Kingdom: 2012–2014, 2015. Available at Last accessed 15 May 2017.
    1. Ishak KJ, Kreif N, Benedict A, Muszbek N. Overview of parametric survival analysis for health‐economic applications. Pharmacoeconomics 2013; 31: 663–675.
    1. R Core Team . R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Available at Last accessed 12 August 2016.
    1. Eurostat . Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) – Health Component – United Kingdom. Available at Last accessed 5 April 2019.
    1. Lee DW, Schernthaner G, Scheen A, Johansen OE, Zinman B. LBPS 02‐49 impact of changes in glucose‐lowering therapy on analyses of glycemic control and weight in EMPA‐REG OUTCOME. J Hypertens 2016; 34: e519.
    1. Clarke PM, Gray AM, Briggs A, Farmer AJ, Fenn P, Stevens RJ et al A model to estimate the lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes: the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model (UKPDS no. 68). Diabetologia 2004; 47: 1747–1759.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . 5.6. Discounting. In Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal 2013 Process and Methods 9. Available at Last accessed 12 August 2016.
    1. Hayes AJ, Leal J, Gray AM, Holman RR, Clarke PM. UKPDS outcomes model 2: a new version of a model to simulate lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using data from the 30 year United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study: UKPDS 82. Diabetologia 2013; 56: 1925–1933.
    1. Schernthaner G, Scheen A, Johansen OE, Mattheus M, Zinman B. Impact of changes in glucose‐lowering therapy on analyses of glycemic control and weight in EMPA‐REG OUTCOME® . Diabetes 2016; 65: 1127‐P.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi