Dataset Information

Real-world cost-effectiveness: lower cost of treating patients to glycemic goal with liraglutide versus exenatide.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

While the liraglutide effect and action in diabetes (LEAD-6) clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of liraglutide once daily (LIRA) to exenatide twice daily (EXEN) in adult patients with type 2 diabetes, few studies have explored the associated per-patient costs of glycemic goal achievement of their use in a real-world clinical setting.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study used integrated medical and pharmacy claims linked with glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C) results from the IMS Patient-Centric Integrated Data Warehouse. Patients' ≥18 years and naïve to incretin therapies during a 6-month pre-index period, with ≥1 prescription for LIRA or EXEN between January 2010 and December 2010, were included. Patients with evidence of insulin use (pre- or post-index) were excluded. Only patients who were persistent on their index treatment during a 180-day post-index period were included. Follow-up A1C assessments were based on available laboratory data within 45 days before or after the 6-month post-index point in time. Diabetes-related pharmacy costs over the 6-month post-index period were captured and included costs for both the index drugs and concomitant diabetes medications.

Results

234 LIRA and 182 EXEN patients were identified for the analysis. The adjusted predicted diabetes-related pharmacy costs per patient over the 6-month post-index period were higher for LIRA compared to EXEN ($2,002 [95% confidence interval (CI): $1,981, $2,023] vs. $1,799 [95% CI: $1,778, $1,820]; P < 0.001). However, a higher adjusted predicted percentage of patients on LIRA reached A1C < 7% goal (64.4% [95% CI: 63.5, 65.3] vs. 53.6% [95% CI: 52.6, 54.6]; P < 0.05), translating into lower average diabetes-related pharmacy costs per successfully treated patient for LIRA as compared to EXEN ($3,108 vs. $3,354; P < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Although predicted diabetes-related pharmacy costs were greater with LIRA vs. EXEN, a higher proportion of patients on LIRA achieved A1C < 7%, resulting in a lower per-patient cost of A1C goal achievement with LIRA compared to EXEN.

SUBMITTER: DeKoven M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3930836 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:This study compared the clinical and economic outcomes of long-term use of liraglutide versus sitagliptin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in real-world practice in the USA. METHODS:We identified adult patients (≥ 18 years old) with T2DM who initiated liraglutide or sitagliptin in 2010-2014 using a large claims database. Quarterly glycemic control measures and annual healthcare costs were assessed during the 1st and 2nd years of persistent medication use. Their associations with medication use (liraglutide or sitagliptin) were estimated using multivariable regression models adjusted for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS:A total of 3113 patients persistently used liraglutide (N = 493) or sitagliptin (N = 2620) for ≥ 1 year [mean age (standard deviation, SD): 53 (8.5) vs. 56 (9.7) years; 48.3% vs. 62.3% males; both p < 0.05]; 911 (including 113 liraglutide users) were persistent users for ≥ 2 years. During the 1st-year follow-up, liraglutide users (versus sitagliptin users, after adjustment) experienced larger glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reductions from baseline (ranging from 0.34%-point in quarter 1 to 0.21%-point in quarter 4); higher likelihoods of obtaining HbA1c reductions of ≥ 1%-points or ≥ 2%-points [odds ratios (ORs) range 1.47-2.04]; and higher likelihoods of reaching HbA1c goals of < 6.5% or < 7% (ORs range 1.51-2.12) (all p < 0.05). Liraglutide users also experienced HbA1c reductions from baseline in the 2nd-year follow-up (0.53-0.33%-point, all p < 0.05). Although liraglutide users incurred higher healthcare costs than sitagliptin users during the 1st-year follow-up, they had $2674 (per patient) lower all-cause medical costs (adjusted cost ratio: 0.67, p < 0.05) and similar total costs (all-cause and diabetes-related) in the 2nd year. CONCLUSION:Long-term use of liraglutide for 1 or 2 years was associated with better glycemic control than using sitagliptin. Savings in medical costs were realized for liraglutide users during the 2nd year of persistent treatment, which offset differences in pharmacy costs. FUNDING:Novo Nordisk Inc.

Project description:Background: Traditional diabetes therapies have been associated with weight gain, hypoglycemia, and/or high secondary failure rates. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog use is associated with a minimal risk of hypoglycemia, a persistent average weight loss of 2 to 3 kg, and sustained efficacy even after 3 years of use. Presently, 3 GLP-1 analogs are commercially available in the United States. Objective: To evaluate the real-world clinical utility of once weekly exenatide in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who previously received once or twice daily GLP-1 therapy. Methods: In this pre-post observational study, electronic medical records (EMRs) were reviewed to identify patients meeting all study criteria. Data collected included baseline patient demographic information, duration of diabetes, disease states, medications, pertinent laboratory data, blood pressure, height, weight, and reported adverse drug events. Primary (changes in A1C and percentage of patients reporting adverse effects of therapy) and secondary (percentage of patients with A1C of <7% and changes in weight, blood pressure, and lipids) outcomes were evaluated using appropriate statistical analysis. Results: EMRs of 78 patients met all study criteria. Baseline patient demographic information included an average age of 61 ± 12 years, an average duration of T2DM of 14 ± 6 years, 59% of patients were male, and 93.6% were Caucasian. The baseline average body mass index was 39 ± 9.2, and mean A1C was 7.47 ± 1.45%. After a minimum of 3 months (average = 5.6 months) switchover, there were significant decreases in A1C (-0.35%; P = .0067) and weight (-1.6 kg; P = .0151). There were no significant changes in blood pressure or lipid levels. Two patients (2.5%) discontinued once weekly exenatide due to adverse reactions. Conclusion: Once weekly exenatide was generally well tolerated and significantly reduced A1C levels and body weight in patients with T2DM when switched from a shorter-acting GLP-1 analog.

Project description:IntroductionIn clinical trials, liraglutide has proven to be an effective drug for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The real-world effectiveness of liraglutide has been investigated in numerous studies. The aim of this systematic literature review is to collate evidence on the real-world clinical effectiveness of liraglutide.MethodsA review of publications from Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and conference proceedings was conducted to identify observational studies that assessed the clinical effectiveness of liraglutide in real-world clinical practice. This review was conducted according to the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. No language or time limits were applied, except to the conference proceedings (2013-2015). Endpoints for data extraction were decided a priori. Study quality appraisal was done for full-text journal articles.ResultsOf 124 publications included in the review, 43 were full-text articles. Liraglutide significantly reduces glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) within 6 months of initiating treatment (mean change in HbA1c from baseline: -0.9% to -2.2%; HbA1c <7.0%: 29.5-65.0%). The NICE composite endpoint (HbA1c reduction ≥1% and weight reduction ≥3%) was met in 16.9-47.0% of patients with liraglutide treatment. Liraglutide therapy led to a mean change in absolute weight from baseline of -1.3 to -8.65 kg. Liraglutide treatment was well tolerated in patients with T2DM. The rate of occurrence of hypoglycemia with liraglutide monotherapy was ≤0.8%. Hypoglycemia was more common in patients taking antidiabetic medications (0.0-15.2%) together with liraglutide. The beneficial glycemic and weight effect of liraglutide therapy in patients with T2DM was maintained for at least 12 months.ConclusionEvidence from observational studies reflecting real-world clinical practice demonstrates that liraglutide therapy improves glycemic control with a low risk of hypoglycemia, and is associated with significant weight loss in patients with T2DM. These observations are consistent with clinical trial findings.FundingNovo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic metabolic disease with substantial morbidity, mortality, and economic impacts. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, such as once-daily (QD) liraglutide and once-weekly (QW) exenatide, are FDA-approved treatment for T2DM. Head-to-head trials and meta-analyses comparing these agents have reported clinically meaningful improvements but small differences in glycemic control between both agents. In this study, we calculate and compare the cost-effectiveness implications of these alternative effectiveness outcomes.MethodsWe developed a decision model to evaluate the short-term cost-effectiveness of exenatide QW 2 mg versus liraglutide QD 1.8 mg in T2DM patients, with effectiveness measured as reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). In the base case, the model tracks change in HbA1c and direct medical expenditure over a 6-month time horizon. We calculated and compared the cost per 1% reduction in HbA1c of models populated with clinical data from a head-to-head randomized, controlled trial (DURATION-6) and a network meta-analysis. Expenditure inputs were derived from wholesale acquisition costs and published sources.ResultsIn the base case, 6-month expenditure for the liraglutide and exenatide strategies were $3,509 and $2,618, respectively. Using clinical data from DURATION-6 and the network meta-analysis, the liraglutide strategy had an incremental cost per 1% reduction in HbA1c of $4,773 and $27,179, respectively. The most influential model parameters were drug costs, magnitude of HbA1c reduction in patients on treatment for >1 month, and liraglutide gastrointestinal adverse event rate. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) using DURATION-6 data, the exenatide strategy was optimal at willingness-to-pay levels below $4,800 per 1% reduction in HbA1c. In a PSA using meta-analysis data, the exenatide strategy was dominant.ConclusionsOur modeled results demonstrate that the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of liraglutide QD 1.8 mg relative to exenatide QW 2 mg depend largely on the chosen source of the clinical data.