Treatment Costs of Basal Insulin Regimens for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in France.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
Our objectives were to describe the basal insulin treatment regimens most widely used in a real-world setting in France and to estimate the associated treatment costs in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Methods
A cross-sectional observational study was conducted (November 2017-February 2018) among adult patients with T2DM requiring basal insulin therapy for their own use in a representative sample of pharmacies. Costs were compared between patients treated with three recently marketed insulins (glargine 300 U/ml [Gla-300], biosimilar glargine 100 U/ml [Gla-100] and a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide) and those treated with three established basal or intermediate insulins: branded glargine 100 U/ml, insulin detemir and neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin [NPH]).Results
Overall, 1933 patients were analysed. Gla-300 accounted for 59.9% of novel basal insulin prescriptions, and branded Gla-100 accounted for 67.9% of established insulin prescriptions. Recent insulins were more frequently associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues. Results confirmed a lower rate of severe hypoglycaemia with Gla-300 than with Gla-100. On average, weekly total costs of treatment with all basal insulins were not significantly different, except with detemir, where they were higher.Conclusion
New basal insulins are expected to be integrated into clinical practice. This analysis shows that their use does not impact upon the management cost of insulin therapy in people with T2DM.
SUBMITTER: Detournay B
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8160062 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To review published clinical studies on the efficacy and safety of new insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300), a new long-acting insulin analog, for the treatment of type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM, T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS:Data sources comprised primary research articles on Gla-300, including pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and clinical studies. RESULTS:In pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic studies, Gla-300 showed a flatter time-action profile and longer duration of action than Gla-100. Noninferiority of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 for lowering of glycated hemoglobin was demonstrated in Phase III clinical studies covering a range of T1DM and T2DM patient populations. Over 6-12 months of follow-up, Gla-300 consistently showed comparable glycemic efficacy with less hypoglycemia vs Gla-100, even during the first 8 weeks of treatment. Although titrated insulin doses were 11%-17% higher with Gla-300 vs Gla-100, changes in body weight were similar or favored Gla-300. CONCLUSION:Clinical studies provide evidence that the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of Gla-300 may translate into clinical benefits in both T1DM and T2DM. Gla-300 may provide a new option for people initiating basal insulin, those requiring higher basal insulin doses, those with T1DM, and those who may be at increased risk for hypoglycemia, such as people with chronic kidney disease, the elderly, and those with cardiovascular comorbidities.
| S-EPMC5501629 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivePremixed insulin is a commonly prescribed formulation for the outpatient management of patients with type 2 diabetes. The safety and efficacy of premixed insulin formulations in the hospital setting is not known.Research design and methodsIn a prospective, open-label trial, we randomized general medicine and surgery patients to receive a basal-bolus regimen with glargine once daily and glulisine before meals (n = 33) or premixed human insulin (30% regular insulin and 70% NPH insulin) twice daily (n = 39). Major outcomes included differences in daily blood glucose (BG) levels and frequency of hypoglycemic events (<70 mg/dL) between treatment groups.ResultsAt the first prespecified interim analysis, the study was stopped early because of an increased frequency of hypoglycemia >50% in patients treated with premixed human insulin. A total of 64% of patients treated with premixed insulin experienced one or more episodes of hypoglycemia compared with 24% in the basal-bolus group (P < 0.001). There were no differences in mean daily BG level after the first day of insulin treatment (175 ± 32 vs. 179 ± 43 mg/dL, P = 0.64) between groups. A BG target between 80 and 180 mg/dL before meals was achieved in 55.9% of BG readings in the basal-bolus group and 54.3% of BG readings in the premixed insulin group (P = 0.23). There was no difference in the length of hospital stay or mortality between treatment groups.ConclusionsInpatient treatment with premixed human insulin resulted in similar glycemic control but in significantly higher frequency of hypoglycemia compared with treatment with basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalized patients with diabetes.
| S-EPMC4657612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Treatment guidelines recommend a stepwise approach to glycemia management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but this may result in uncontrolled glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between steps. This retrospective analysis compared clinical and economic outcomes among patients with uncontrolled T2D initiating two oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or basal insulin in a real-world setting. METHODS:Adults with T2D on OAD monotherapy were identified in the MarketScan claims database (2007-2014). Those initiating two OADs (simultaneously or sequentially), GLP-1 RAs, or basal insulin were selected (date of initiation was termed the 'index date'); patients were required to have HbA1c > 7.0% in the 6 months pre-index date. HbA1c was compared from 6 months pre- to 1-year post-index. Annual all-cause healthcare utilization and costs were reported over the 1-year follow-up period. RESULTS:Data for 6054 patients were analyzed (2-OAD, n = 4442; GLP-1 RA, n = 361; basal insulin, n = 1251). Baseline HbA1c was high in all cohorts, but highest in the basal-insulin cohort. Treatment initiation resulted in reductions in HbA1c in all cohorts, which was generally maintained throughout the follow-up period. Average HbA1c reductions from the 6 months pre- to 1 year post-index date were -1.2% for GLP-1 RA, -1.6% for OADs, and -1.8% for basal insulin. HbA1c < 7.0% at 1 year occurred in 32.6%, 47.5%, and 41.1% of patients, respectively. Annual healthcare costs (mean [SD]) were lowest for OAD (US$10,074 [$22,276]) followed by GLP-1 RA (US$14,052 [$23,829]) and basal insulin (US$18,813 [$37,332]). CONCLUSION:Despite robust HbA1c lowering following treatment initiation, many patients did not achieve HbA1c < 7.0%. Basal insulin, generally prescribed for patients with high baseline HbA1c, was associated with a large reduction in HbA1c and with higher costs. Therapy intensification at an appropriate time could lead to clinical and economic benefits and should be investigated further. FUNDING:Sanofi U.S., Inc.
| S-EPMC5984932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We performed a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of 12 single-drug regimens (Glibenclamide, Glimepiride, Pioglitazone, Rosiglitazone, Repaglinide, Metformin, Sitaglitin, Exenatide, Liraglutide, Acarbose, Benfluorex, and Glipizide) in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Fifteen relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included; direct and indirect evidence from these studies was combined, and weighted mean difference (WMD) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs) were examined to evaluate the monotherapies. Liraglutide was more effective than Glimepiride, Pioglitazone, Sitaglitin, Exenatide, and Glipizide at reducing glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. In contrast, Acarbose was less effective than Glibenclamide, Glimepiride, Pioglitazone, Rosiglitazone, Repaglinide, Metformin, and Liraglutide at decreasing HbA1c levels. Reductions in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels were similar after all treatments. Rosiglitazone was less effective than Glibenclamide and Repaglinide at reducing total cholesterol (TC) levels. High density lipoprotein (HDL), low density lipoprotein (LDL), and triglyceride levels did not differ after treatment with any of the monotherapies. HbA1c and FPG SUCRA values were highest for Liraglutide, while HbA1c and FPG values were lowest for Acarbose, and TC and LDL values were lowest for Rosiglitazone. These results suggest that Liraglutide may be most effective, and Acarbose least effective, at reducing blood glucose levels, while Glibenclamide, Repaglinide, and Metformin may be most effective, and Rosiglitazone least effective, at reducing lipoidemia, in T2DM patients.
| S-EPMC5641162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIMS/INTRODUCTION:Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of long-acting insulin degludec (IDeg) and rapid-acting insulin aspart (IAsp). The present study investigated the pharmacodynamic properties of IDegAsp in Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this randomized, double-blind, two-period, cross-over trial, 21 Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus received single doses of 0.5 U/kg IDegAsp and biphasic insulin aspart 30 in a randomized sequence (13-21 days washout between treatments). The pharmacodynamic response was evaluated in a 26-h euglycemic glucose clamp (target 5.5 mmol/L). Single-dose IDegAsp glucose infusion rate (GIR) profiles were extrapolated to steady state using modeling. RESULTS:The IDegAsp single-dose GIR profile showed a clear distinction between the effects of the bolus (IAsp) and basal (IDeg) components in IDegAsp. When simulated to steady state, the GIR profile of IDegAsp was shifted upwards compared with the single-dose profile, and showed a rapid onset of action and a distinct peak from the IAsp component followed by a separate and sustained basal action from the long-acting IDeg component. For biphasic insulin aspart 30, the initial shape of the GIR profile was similar to IDegAsp, but GIR continuously decreased from maximum and reached zero 18-20 h post-dosing. The characteristics of the GIR profile for IDegAsp were retained when simulated to steady state in a twice-daily dosing regimen. DISCUSSION:In Japanese patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the pharmacodynamic profile of IDegAsp is characterized by distinct prandial and basal effects from the IAsp and IDeg components, consistent with what has been reported previously in Caucasian patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
| S-EPMC4931208 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims/introductionThe aim of the present study was to assess the glycemic control, adherence and treatment satisfaction in a real-world setting with basal insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes patients in Taiwan.Materials and methodsThis was a multicenter, prospective, observational registry. A total of 836 patients with type 2 diabetes taking oral antidiabetic drugs with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >7% entered the study. Basal insulin was given for 24 weeks. All treatment choices and medical instructions were at the physician's discretion to reflect real-life practice.ResultsAfter 24-week treatment, 11.7% of patients reached set HbA1c goals without severe hypoglycemia (primary effectiveness end-point). HbA1c and fasting blood glucose were significantly decreased from (mean ± SD) 10.1 ± 1.9% to 8.7 ± 1.7% (-1.4 ± 2.1%, P < 0.0001) and from 230.6 ± 68.8 mg/dL to 159.1 ± 55.6 mg/dL (-67.4 ± 72.3 mg/dL, P < 0.0001), respectively. Patients received insulin therapy at a frequency of nearly one shot per day on average, whereas self-monitoring of blood glucose was carried out approximately four times a week. Hypoglycemia was reported by 11.4% of patients, and only 0.7% of patients experienced severe hypoglycemia. Slight changes in weight (0.7 ± 2.4 kg) and a low incidence of adverse drug reactions (0.4%) were also noted. The score of 7-point treatment satisfaction rated by patients was significantly improved by 1.9 ± 1.7 (P < 0.0001).ConclusionsBasal insulin therapy was associated with a decrease in HbA1c and fasting blood glucose, and an improved treatment satisfaction. Most patients complied with physicians' instructions. The treatment was generally well tolerated by patients with type 2 diabetes, but findings pointed out the need to reinforce the early and appropriate uptitration to achieve treatment targets.
| S-EPMC5089951 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes represents an increasingly critical challenge for health policy worldwide. It absorbs massive resources from both patients and national economies to sustain direct costs of the treatment of type 2 diabetes and its complications and indirect costs related to work loss and wages. More recently, there are innovations based on remote control and personalised programs that promise a more cost-effective diabetes management while reducing diabetes-related complications. In such a context, this work attempts to update cost analysis reviews on type 2 diabetes, focusing on France and Germany, in order to explore most significant cost drivers and cost-saving opportunities through innovations in diabetes care. Although both countries approach care delivery differently, France and Germany represent the primary European markets for diabetes technologies.MethodsA systematic review of the literature listed in MEDLINE, Embase and EconLit has been carried out. It covered interventional, observational and modelling studies on expenditures for type 2 diabetes management in France or Germany published since 2012. Included articles were analysed for annual direct, associated and indirect costs of type 2 diabetes patients. An appraisal of study quality was performed. Results were summarised narratively.ResultsFrom 1260 records, the final sample was composed of 24 papers selected according to predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Both France and Germany revealed a predominant focus on direct costs. Comparability was limited due to different study populations and cost categories used. Indirect costs were only available in Germany. According to prior literature, reported cost drivers are hospitalisation, prescriptions, higher HbA1c and BMI, treatment with insulin and complications, all indicators of disease severity. The diversity of available data and included costs limits the results and may explain the differences found.ConclusionsComplication prevention and glycaemic control are widely recognized as the most effective ways to control diabetes treatment costs. The value propositions of self-based supports, such as hybrid closed-loop metabolic systems, already implemented in type 1 diabetes management, are the key points for further debates and policymaking, which should involve the perspectives of caregivers, patients and payers.
| S-EPMC7667793 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe objective of this study was to assess basal insulin persistence, associated factors, and economic outcomes for insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Japan.MethodsPeople aged at least 18 years with T2DM with first claim for basal insulin between May 2006 and April 2013 (index date), no insulin use before index date, and continuous insurance coverage for 6 months before (baseline) and 12 months after index date were selected from the Japan Medical Center Database. On the basis of whether there were at least 30-day gaps in basal insulin treatment, patients were classified as continuers (no gap), interrupters (at least one prescription after gap), and discontinuers (no prescription after gap). A multinomial logistic regression model identified factors associated with persistence. Annual healthcare resource use and costs in the year after initiation were compared between continuers and interrupters and between continuers and discontinuers using propensity score-based inverse probability weighting to adjust for baseline differences.ResultsOf the 827 people included (mean age 50 years, ca. 71% male), 36% continued, 42% interrupted, and 22% discontinued basal insulin therapy in the year after initiation. Having at least one inpatient visit and using fewer classes of non-insulin antihyperglycemic medications during baseline were associated with lower likelihoods of continuing therapy. Relative to interrupters and discontinuers, continuers had lower hospitalization rates [continuers, 12.7%; interrupters, 25.4% (p < 0.001); discontinuers, 28.4% (p < 0.001)] and lower inpatient costs [continuers, ¥132,013; interrupters, ¥225,745 (p = 0.054); discontinuers, ¥320,582 (p = 0.036)], but higher pharmacy costs [continuers, ¥158,403; interrupters, ¥134,301 (p = 0.039); discontinuers, ¥121,593 (p = 0.002)] in the year after insulin initiation. Total healthcare costs were similar for the three cohorts.ConclusionsSubstantial proportions of people with T2DM in Japan interrupt or discontinue basal insulin within the year after initiation, and they have higher rates and costs of hospitalizations than patients who continue with their insulin therapy. Further research is needed to understand reasons behind basal insulin persistence and the implications thereof to help clinicians manage T2DM more effectively.FundingEli Lilly and Company, Boehringer Ingelheim.
| S-EPMC5306114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundChronically elevated blood glucose levels are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Many diabetes patients will eventually require insulin treatment to maintain good glycaemic control. There are still uncertainties about the optimal insulin treatment regimens for type 2 diabetes, but the long-acting insulin analogues seem beneficial. Several reviews have compared either insulin detemir or insulin glargine to NPH insulin, but research directly comparing both insulin analogues is limited.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of insulin detemir and insulin glargine compared with each other in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.Search strategyWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, online registries of ongoing trials and abstract books. Date of last search was January 2011.Selection criteriaAll randomised controlled trials comparing insulin detemir with insulin glargine with a duration of 12 weeks or longer were included.Data collection and analysisTwo authors independently selected the studies and extracted the data. Pooling of studies by means of random-effects meta-analysis was performed.Main resultsThis review examined four trials lasting 24 to 52 weeks involving 2250 people randomised to either insulin detemir or glargine. Overall, risk of bias of the evaluated studies was high. Insulin glargine was dosed once-daily in the evening. Insulin detemir was initiated once-daily in the evening with the option of an additional dose in the morning in three studies and initiated twice-daily in one study. Of randomised patients 13.6% to 57.2% were injecting insulin detemir twice-daily at the end of trial.Glycaemic control, measured by glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and HbA1c equal to or less than 7% with or without hypoglycaemia, did not differ statistically significantly between treatment groups.The results showed no significant differences in overall, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia between treatment groups.Insulin detemir was associated with less weight gain. Treatment with insulin glargine resulted in a lower daily basal insulin dose and a lower number of injection site reactions.There was no significant difference in the variability of FPG or glucose values in 24-hour profiles between treatment groups. It was not possible to draw conclusions on quality of life, costs or mortality. Only one trial reported results on health-related quality of life and showed no significant differences between treatment groups.Authors' conclusionsOur analyses suggest that there is no clinically relevant difference in efficacy or safety between insulin detemir and insulin glargine for targeting hyperglycaemia. However, to achieve the same glycaemic control insulin detemir was often injected twice-daily in a higher dose but with less weight gain, while insulin glargine was injected once-daily, with somewhat fewer injection site reactions.
| S-EPMC6486036 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis study compared basal analog (BA: glargine U100/mL and detemir) and premix (PM: human, lispro and aspart biphasic) insulin regimens in terms of their efficacy and safety in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.MethodsSearches of MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL identified primary randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ≥ 12 weeks in duration that compared BA or PM insulin regimens in adults with T2DM, with ≥ 30 patients per arm. A systematic literature review and a pairwise meta-analysis were performed using a random effects model adjusted for between-study variability. Analyses were conducted based on frequency of bolus insulin and PM injections, PM ratio and type, BA type, race, follow-up period, and baseline glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c).ResultsTwenty-two primary RCTs with 9691 patients were included. The BA and PM regimens yielded similar changes in HbA1c and postprandial glucose levels, with a statistically significant reduction in fasting glucose [mean difference (MD) - 0.61 mmol/L (95% confidence interval (CI) - 0.90, - 0.32), I2 = 89.6%]. The BA regimens showed significantly reduced rates of total hypoglycemia [odds ratio (OR) 0.77 (95% CI 0.64, 0.92), I2 = 65.3%] and changes in body weight [MD - 0.48 kg (95% CI - 0.86, - 0.11), I2 = 75.7%] compared to PM regimens. Stratification by PM type and dosing ratio demonstrated statistically significant reductions in HbA1c favoring BA compared to human [MD - 0.39% (95% CI - 0.60, - 0.18), I2 = 61.8%] or 50/50-ratio [MD - 0.22% (95% CI - 0.40, - 0.04), I2 = 0.0%] PM regimens. Other subgroup analyses found no difference in HbA1c change between the BA and PM regimens.ConclusionWhen compared to PM regimens, BA regimens yielded similar efficacies and better safety profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.FundingSanofi (Shanghai, China).
| S-EPMC6531585 | biostudies-literature