Cost-utility analysis of liraglutide compared with sulphonylurea or sitagliptin, all as add-on to metformin monotherapy in Type 2 diabetes mellitus

M J Davies, B D Chubb, I C Smith, W J Valentine, M J Davies, B D Chubb, I C Smith, W J Valentine

Abstract

Aim: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of liraglutide as add-on to metformin vs. glimepiride or sitagliptin in patients with Type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with first-line metformin.

Methods: Data were sourced from a clinical trial comparing liraglutide vs. glimepiride, both in combination with metformin, and a clinical trial comparing liraglutide vs. sitagliptin, both as add-on to metformin. Only the subgroup of patients in whom liraglutide was added to metformin monotherapy was included in the cost-utility analysis. The CORE Diabetes Model was used to simulate outcomes and costs with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg vs. glimepiride and vs. sitagliptin over patients' lifetimes. Treatment effects were taken directly from the trials. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5% per annum and costs were accounted from a third-party payer (UK National Health System) perspective.

Results: Treatment with liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg resulted, respectively, in mean increases in quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.32 ± 0.15 and 0.28 ± 0.14 quality-adjusted life years vs. glimepiride, and 0.19 ± 0.15 and 0.31 ± 0.15 quality-adjusted life years vs. sitagliptin, and was associated with higher costs of £ 3003 ± £ 678 and £ 4688 ± £ 639 vs. glimepiride, and £ 1842 ± £ 751 and £ 3224 ± £ 683 vs. sitagliptin, over a patient's lifetime. Both liraglutide doses were cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £ 9449 and £ 16,501 per quality-adjusted life year gained vs. glimepiride, and £ 9851 and £ 10,465 per quality-adjusted life year gained vs. sitagliptin, respectively.

Conclusions: Liraglutide, added to metformin monotherapy, is a cost-effective option for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes in a UK setting.

© 2011 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2011 Diabetes UK.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve of liraglutide vs. glimepiride, base case. QALY, quality-adjusted life year.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve of liraglutide vs. sitagliptin, base case. QALY, quality-adjusted life year.

References

    1. World Health Organization. Diabetes. Fact sheet no. 312. 2009. Available at Last accessed 14 January 2011.
    1. Williams R, Van Gaal L, Lucioni C. Assessing the impact of complications on the costs of type II diabetes. Diabetologia. 2002;45:S13–S17.
    1. Koopmanschap M. Coping with type II diabetes: the patient’s perspective. Diabetologia. 2002;45:S18–S22.
    1. National Collaborating Centre for Chronic Conditions. Type 2 Diabetes: National Clinical Guideline for Management in Primary and Secondary Care (update) London: Royal College of Physicians; 2008.
    1. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HAW, Matthews DR, Manley SE, Cull CA, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. Br Med J. 2000;321:405–412.
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Type 2 Diabetes: Newer Agents for Blood Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes. 2009. Available at Last accessed 14 January 2011.
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Final Appraisal Determination. Liraglutide for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes. 2010. Available at Last accessed 14 January 2011.
    1. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, Ferrannini E, Holman RR, Sherwin R. Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:193–203.
    1. White J. Efficacy and safety of incretin-based therapies: clinical trial data. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2009;49:S30–S40.
    1. Nauck MA, Frid A, Hermansen K, Shah NS, Tankova T, Mitha IH, et al. LEAD-2 Study Group. Efficacy and safety comparison of liraglutide, glimepiride, and placebo, all in combination with metformin in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:84–90.
    1. Pratley RE, Nauck M, Bailey T, Montanya E, Cuddihy R, Filetti S, et al. for the 1860-LIRA-DPP-4 Study Group. Liraglutide versus sitagliptin for patients with type 2 diabetes who did not have adequate glycaemic control with metformin: a 26-week, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial. Lancet. 2010;375:1447–1456.
    1. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, et al. The CORE Diabetes Model: projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of intervention in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision making. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:S5–S26.
    1. Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, et al. Validation of the CORE Diabetes Model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20:S27–S40.
    1. National institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Measuring Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness: the QALY. 2010. Available at Last accessed 14 January 2011.
    1. Haymarket Publications. Monthly Index of Medical Specialities (MIMS) London: Haymarket Publications; 2009. August 2009 edition.
    1. National institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. 2008. Available at Last accessed 27 March 2011.
    1. Tarn T, Smith M. Pharmacoeconomic guidelines around the world. ISPOR Connections. 2004;10:5–15.
    1. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on the Use of Long-Acting Insulin Analogues for the treatment of Diabetes – Insulin Glargine (TA53) 2002. Available at Last accessed 14 January 2011.
    1. Russell-Jones D, Nauck M, Brandle M, Vaag A, Colagiuri S, Schmitz O, et al. The once-daily human GLP-1 analogue liraglutide reduces body weight in subjects with type 2 diabetes, irrespective of body mass index at baseline. Diabetes. 2006;57:A593.
    1. Brod M, Cobden D, Lammert M, Bushnell D, Raskin P. Examining correlates of treatment satisfaction for injectable insulin in type 2 diabetes: lessons learned from a clinical trial comparing biphasic and basal analogues. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2007;5:8.
    1. Jacobs van der Bruggen MAM, Van Baal PH, Hoogenveen RT, Feenstra TL, Briggs AH, Lawson K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of lifestyle modification in diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1453–1458.
    1. Gillett M, Dallosso HM, Brennan A, Carey ME, Campbell MJ, Heller S, et al. Delivering the diabetes education and self management for ongoing and newly diagnosed (DESMOND) programme for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: cost-effectiveness analysis. Br Med J. 2010;341:c4093.
    1. Valentine WJ, Bottmley JM, Palmer AJ, Brändle M, Foos V, Williams R, et al. PROactive 06: cost-effectiveness of pioglitazone in Type 2 diabetes in the UK. Diabet Med. 2007;24:982–1002.
    1. Schwarz B, Gouveia M, Chen J, Nocea G, Jameson K, Cook J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of sitagliptin-based treatment regimens in European patients with type 2 diabetes and haemoglobin A1c above target on metformin monotherapy. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2008;10:S43–S55.
    1. Ebrahim S, Davey Smith G, McCabe C, Payne N, Pickin M, Sheldon TA, et al. What role for statins? A review and economic model. Health Technol Assess. 1999;3:i–iv. 1–91.
    1. Scottish Diabetes Survey Monitoring Group. Scottish Diabetes Survey 2007. 2007. Available at Last accessed 14 January 2011.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi