Dataset Information

Diabetes-Related Effectiveness and Cost of Liraglutide or Insulin in German Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A 5-Year Retrospective Claims Analysis.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:Liraglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). To date, limited long-term data (>?2 years) exist comparing real-world diabetes-related effectiveness and costs for liraglutide versus insulin treatment. METHODS:This retrospective claims data analysis covered the period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2017 and included continuously insured patients with T2DM who initiated insulin or liraglutide and had 3.5 or 5 years' follow-up data, identified using the German AOK PLUS dataset. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for patient characteristics. RESULTS:After PSM, there were 825 and 436 patients in the liraglutide and insulin groups at 3.5 and 5 years' follow-up, respectively. Baseline characteristics were similar between compared cohorts. The respective change from baseline to follow-up in mean glycated haemoglobin for liraglutide and insulin patients was?-?0.88% and?-?0.81% (p?>?0.100) after 3.5 years and?-?1.15%/?-?1.02% (p?>?0.100) after 5 years. Mean respective changes in body mass index (kg/m2) were?-?1.21/+ 1.14 (p??0.100). CONCLUSION:The clinical effectiveness of liraglutide is maintained long term (up to 5 years). Liraglutide treatment is not associated with higher total direct healthcare costs.

SUBMITTER: Wilke T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7509007 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diabetes-Related Effectiveness and Cost of Liraglutide or Insulin in German Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A 5-Year Retrospective Claims Analysis.

Wilke Thomas T Mueller Sabrina S Fuchs Andreas A Kaltoft Margit S MS Kipper Stefan S Cel Malgorzata M

Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders 20200902 10

<h4>Introduction</h4>Liraglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). To date, limited long-term data (> 2 years) exist comparing real-world diabetes-related effectiveness and costs for liraglutide versus insulin treatment.<h4>Methods</h4>This retrospective claims data analysis covered the period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2017 and included continuously insured patients with T2DM who initiated insulin or liraglutide and had 3.5 or 5 years' ...[more]

PMID: 32876862

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWe assessed the cost-effectiveness of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists liraglutide 1.8 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (both added to basal insulin) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Sweden.MethodsThe Swedish Institute for Health Economics cohort model for T2D was used to compare liraglutide and lixisenatide (both added to basal insulin), with a societal perspective and with comparative treatment effects derived by indirect treatment comparison (ITC). Drug prices were 2016 values, and all other costs 2015 values. The cost-effectiveness of IDegLira (fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide) versus lixisenatide plus basal insulin was also assessed, under different sets of assumptions.ResultsFrom the ITC, decreases in HbA1c were -1.32% and -0.43% with liraglutide and lixisenatide, respectively; decreases in BMI were -1.29 and -0.65 kg/m2, respectively. An estimated 2348 cases of retinopathy, 265 of neuropathy and 991 of nephropathy would be avoided with liraglutide compared with lixisenatide in a cohort of 10,000 patients aged over 40 years. In the base-case analysis, total direct costs were higher with liraglutide than lixisenatide, but costs associated with complications were lower. The cost/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for liraglutide added to basal insulin was SEK30,802. Base-case findings were robust in sensitivity analyses, except when glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) differences for liraglutide added to basal insulin were abolished, suggesting these benefits were driving the cost/QALY. With liraglutide 1.2 mg instead of liraglutide 1.8 mg (adjusted for efficacy and cost), liraglutide added to basal insulin was dominant over lixisenatide 20μg.IDegLira was dominant versus lixisenatide plus basal insulin when a defined daily dose was used in the model.ConclusionsThe costs/QALY for liraglutide, 1.8 or 1.2 mg, added to basal insulin, and for IDegLira (all compared with lixisenatide 20 μg added to basal insulin) were below the threshold considered low by Swedish authorities. In some scenarios, liraglutide and IDegLira were cost-saving.

Project description:IntroductionThe American Diabetes Association (ADA) has identified a target hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) < 7% as appropriate for most adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This research examines US diabetes-related healthcare costs for adults with T2D for individuals with glycemic control (HbA1c < 7%) compared to poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7%).MethodsThe Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart database from 2016 to 2020 was used to identify a cohort of adults with T2D who had a recorded HbA1c test (with first such date identified as the index date) and continuous insurance from 1 year prior through 1 year post index date. Patients with glycemic control were propensity matched to patients with poor glycemic control. Generalized linear models and two-part models examined diabetes-related outpatient, drug, acute care, and total costs over the 1-year post-period.ResultsThere were 34,538 propensity matched individuals included in the study. Results indicate that glycemic control (HbA1c < 7%), compared to poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7%) ,was associated with statistically significantly lower annual diabetes-related acute ($5671 ± $4216 vs $6138 ± $4211), outpatient ($6051 ± $4216 vs $7259 ± $7771), drug ($3739 ± $4581 vs $4288 ± $4788), and total costs care ($13,704 ± $10,635 vs $16,460 ± $10,885) (all P < 0.0001). Sensitivity analyses also examined results based upon alternative HbA1c thresholds which were chosen on the basis of expert guidelines and prior clinical trial thresholds (< 6%, ≤ 6.5%, < 8%, and ≤ 9%). In all cases, being below threshold was associated with statistically significantly lower diabetes-related total costs and component costs. Results also illustrate that, in general, higher HbA1c thresholds are associated with higher diabetes-related costs.ConclusionGlycemic control was found to be associated with significantly lower annual diabetes-related component and total costs. Results suggest economic benefits associated with having HbA1c at or below target.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Insulin analogues may be associated with fewer episodes of hypoglycemia than conventional insulins. However, they are costly alternatives. We compared the cost-effectiveness of insulin analogues and conventional insulins used to treat type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus in adults. METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness evaluation of insulin analogues versus conventional insulins using the Center for Outcomes Research Diabetes Model. We compared rapid-acting analogues (insulin aspart and insulin lispro) with regular human insulin, and long-acting analogues (insulin glargine and insulin detemir) with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin. We derived clinical information for the comparisons from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. We obtained cost and utility estimates from published sources. We performed sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of our results. RESULTS: For type 1 diabetes, insulin aspart was more effective and less costly than regular human insulin. Insulin lispro was associated with an incremental cost of Can$28,996 per quality-adjusted life-year. The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year was Can$87,932 for insulin glargine and Can$387,729 for insulin detemir, compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin. For type 2 diabetes, insulin aspart was associated with an incremental cost of Can$22,488 per quality-adjusted life-year compared with regular human insulin. For insulin lispro, the incremental cost was Can$130,865. Compared with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, insulin detemir was less effective and more costly. Insulin glargine was associated with an incremental cost of Can$642,994 per quality-adjusted life-year. The model was sensitive to changes in the effect size of hemoglobin A(1c) and to decrements applied to utility scores when fear of hypoglycemia was included as a factor. INTERPRETATION: The cost-effectiveness of insulin analogues depends on the type of insulin analogue and whether the patient receiving the treatment has type 1 or type 2 diabetes. With the exception of rapid-acting insulin analogues in type 1 diabetes, routine use of insulin analogues, especially long-acting analogues in type 2 diabetes, is unlikely to represent an efficient use of finite health care resources.

Project description:ObjectivesMetformin is the first-line therapy for most patients with type 2 diabetes, but the majority require treatment intensification at some stage due to the progressive nature of the disease. The 1860-LIRA-DPP-4 trial showed that liraglutide exhibited greater improvements compared with sitagliptin in glycated hemoglobin and body mass index in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy. As a follow-up to a previously published cost-effectiveness analysis of 1.2 mg liraglutide versus sitagliptin in Spain, the aim of this analysis was to compare long-term projections of the clinical and cost implications associated with 1.8 mg liraglutide and sitagliptin.MethodsFor the modeling analysis, 52-week treatment effect data (as opposed to 26-week data in the previous analysis) were taken from the 1860-LIRA-DPP-4 trial, for adults with type 2 diabetes receiving 1.8 mg liraglutide or 100 mg sitagliptin daily in addition to metformin. Long-term (patient lifetime) projections of clinical outcomes and direct costs (2012 EUR) were made using a published and validated model of type 2 diabetes, with modeling assumptions as per the 1.2 mg liraglutide analysis.ResultsLiraglutide was associated with increased life expectancy (14.24 versus 13.87 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy [9.24 versus 8.84 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] over sitagliptin. Improved clinical outcomes were attributable to the improvement in glycemic control, leading to a reduced incidence of diabetes-related complications, including renal disease, cardiovascular disease, ophthalmic and diabetic foot complications. Liraglutide was associated with increased direct costs (EUR 56,628 versus EUR 52,450), driven by increased pharmacy costs. Based on these estimates, liraglutide was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 10,436 per QALY gained versus sitagliptin.ConclusionsA previous analysis has suggested that 1.2 mg liraglutide is cost-effective from a healthcare payer perspective in Spain, and the present analysis suggests that the 1.8 mg dose is also likely to be cost-effective.

Dataset Information

Diabetes-Related Effectiveness and Cost of Liraglutide or Insulin in German Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A 5-Year Retrospective Claims Analysis.

Publications

Diabetes-Related Effectiveness and Cost of Liraglutide or Insulin in German Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A 5-Year Retrospective Claims Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets